Digitized  by  the  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/biblicalintroducOObennrich 


A  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 


A   BIBLICAL 
INTRODUCTION 


BY 

W.  H.  BENNETT,  M.A.,  D.D.,  Litt.D. 

SOMETIME  FELLOW  OF  ST.   JOHN's  COLLEGE,   CAMBRIDGE;  PROFESSOR  OF  OLD 
TESTAMENT  EXEGESIS,   HACKNEY  AND  NEW  COLLEGES,   LONDON 

AND 

WALTER  F.  ADENEY,  M.A,  D.D. 

PRINCIPAL  OF  LANCASHIRE  COLLEGE,   MANCHESTER 


WITH   A  CONCISE  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

SECOND   EDITION,   REVISED 


NEW  YORK 

THOMAS   WHITTAKER 

1904 


PREFACE 

This  volume  is  intended  for  a  handbook  of  Biblical 
Introduction — dealing  with  such  questions  as  the  date, 
authorship,  composition,  analysis,  and  contents  of  the 
several  books — for  those  who  are  unacquainted  or 
only  slightly  acquainted  with  the  original  languages  of 
the  Bible  and  the  technicalities  of  criticism.  The 
authors  have  been  anxious  to  include  all  matters  of 
importance,  to  state  the  prevalent  views  concerning 
them,  and  to  do  so  at  sufficient  length  to  make  them 
intelligible.  Necessarily,  therefore,  many  details  of 
analysis  and  criticism  have  had  to  be  omitted,  and 
many  theories  held  by  only  a  few  scholars  have  had 
to  be  ignored.  Not  only  did  considerations  of  space 
require  these  omissions,  but  it  was  important  that 
the  student  should  not  be  so  bewildered  by  a  crowd  of 
details  and  conflicting  theories  as  to  be  unable  "  to  see 
the  wood  for  the  trees."  Hence,  only  an  outline  of 
arguments  and  specimens  of  evidence  are  given,  and  it 
must  not  be  supposed  that  an  exhaustive  proof  is  offered 
of  the  positions  maintained.  Similarly  the  authorities 
referred  to  are  merely  a  representative  selection.  Care 
has  been  taken  to  secure  that  the  information  given 
should  be  accurate  and  recent. 

In  the  Old  Testament,  the  critical  position  is, 
speaking  roughly,  that  identified  in  this  country  with 
Professors  Cheyne,  Driver,   Ryle,   G.   A.   Smith,   etc.; 


VI  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

and  generally  assumed  by  the  writers  on  O.T.  subjects 
in  Dr.  Hastings'  Bible  Dictionary}  Brief  notes  as  to 
the  light  thrown  by  Assyrian,  Babylonian,  and  other 
inscriptions  on  the  history  of  Israel  have  been  added 
to  the  passages  of  the  historical  books  which  they 
illustrate.  Under  each  book,  or — where  the  present 
books  are  collections  of  earlier  works  —  under  each 
section,  some  account  is  given  of  its  use  in  the  New 
Testament ;  this  account,  however,  is  not  exhaustive. 
The  references  to  Driver's  Introduction  are  to  the  Sixth 
Edition ;  but,  except  where  specially  stated,  the  numbers 
of  the  pages  are  those  of  the  Fifth  and  earlier  editions, 
which  are  given  in  brackets  [  ]  in  the  text  of  the 
Sixth.  Special  attention  is  called  to  the  explanation 
of  symbols  and  technical  terms  on  pp.  15  ff.,  24  f,  32, 
62  n. 

With  regard  to  the  chapters  on  the  New  Testament,  a 
brief  description  of  the  patristic  writers  cited  will  be 
found  in  an  appendix  ;  for  a  fuller  account  the  reader  is 
referred  to  Professor  Charteris'  Canonicity.  The  scheme 
of  chronology  adopted  in  the  New  Testament  period  is 
that  which  until  recently  has  been  almost  universally 
accepted,  that  followed  in  the  main  by  Schiirer,  Light- 
foot,  Hort,  etc.  Recently  Harnack,  McGiffert,  and 
others  have  argued  for  an  earlier  dating  of  the  chief 
events  in  St.  Paul's  life,  and  of  the  writing  of  his 
epistles.  In  an  important  article  on  "Chronology"  in 
the  new  Bible  Dictionary,  the  writer,  Mr.  C.  H.  Turner, 
has  demonstrated  the  impossibility  of  these  early  dates. 
There  is  still  some  uncertainty ;    but  the  variation  is 

^  The  widespread  acceptance  of  such  views,  even  outside  the  ranks  of 
O.T.  scholars,  may  be  illustrated  by  the  advocacy  of  the  non-historical 
character  of  Jonah  by  the  late  Dr.  R.  W.  Dale  in  the  Expositor  of  July, 
1892. 


PREFACE  vii 

only  a  matter  of  about  five  years,  and  the  relative 
distinctions  of  dates  remain  unchanged.  Under  these 
circumstances  it  seems  wisest  to  adhere  to  the  generally 
accepted  chronology,  though  with  the  proviso  that  it  is 
not  certain,  and  might  perhaps  be  shifted  back  one  or 
two  years,  as  Mr.  Turner  suggests. 

Each  of  the  authors  is  solely  responsible  for  his  own 
share  of  the  book. 

This  account  of  Biblical  criticism  is  published  in 
the  faith  that  "Any  criticism  of  the  human  element 
in  the  Bible,  which  makes  it  more  truly  human,  more 
analogous  to  the  workings  of  the  human  spirit  other- 
where, tends  without  question  to  enhance  our  sense  of 
its  reality  and  worth."  ^  The  authors  of  this  volume 
trust  that  it  may  help  its  readers  to  a  truer  understand- 
ing of  the  sacred  Scriptures,  and  to  a  fuller  appreciation 
of  their  unique  importance  ;  and  may  confirm  them  in 
the  evangelical  recognition  of  the  supreme  authority  of 
the  Bible  as  interpreted  and  applied  by  the  Holy  Spirit 
for  the  spiritual  life. 

*  Canon  Illingworth,  Personality^  etc.f  p.  i86. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SECOND  EDITION 

In  preparing  the  Second  Edition  some  corrections  and 
references  to  recent  criticism  have  been  made  in  the 
body  of  the  text ;  the  Bibliography  has  been  brought 
up  to  date ;  and  three  short  Appendices  have  been 
added. 

The  authors  wish  to  thank  correspondents  who  have 
pointed  out  misprints  and  suggested  emendations,  and 
their  acknowledgments  are  specially  due  to  Rev.  Prof. 
A.  S.  Peake,  M.A. 

The  modification  of  the  title-page  makes  it  necessary 
to  state  here  that  Professor  Bennett  is  responsible  for 
the  sections  on  the  Old  Testament  and  Apocrypha, 
pp.  1-274,  474-481  ;  and  Principal  Adeney  for  the 
sections  on  the  New  Testament,  pp.  275-470,  481-485. 


TABLE   OF  CONTENTS 

PACK 

Preface  .  .  .  .  .       .       v 

OLD   TESTAMENT 

CHAPTER  I. 

Introductory  to  Old  Testament  ,  .       .       i 

I.  MSS.  and  Versions.  2.  External  Evidence.  3.  History 
of  Criticism.    4.  Canon. 

CHAPTER  II. 
Earlier  Historical  Books— Genesis  to  Kings    .       .15 

I.  Alphabetical  Table  of  Terms  and  Symbols.  2.  Methods 
of  Composition.  3.  Earlier  Theories.  4.  Current  Documentary 
Theories.  5.  Methods  of  Analysis.  6.  Limitations  of  Analysis, 
7.  General  Table  of  Analysis.  8.  Sketch  of  Argument. 
9.  Argument  from  Historical  Situation.  10.  Argument 
from  Theology.  11.  Argument  from  Literary  Parallels. 
12.  Linguistic  Argument.  13.  Argument  from  Mutual  Relations 
of  Documents.  14.  J.  15.  E.  16.  JE.  17.  D.  18.  JED. 
19.  II.  20.  P.  21.  Completion  of  Pentateuch.  22.  Mosaic 
Elements.  23.  Genesis.  24.  Exodus.  25.  Leviticus. 
26.  Numbers.  27.  Deuteronomy.  28.  Joshua.  29.  Judges. 
30.  Ruth.  31.  Samuel.  32.  Kings.  33.  Teaching  of 
Historical  Books. 

CHAPTER  IIL 

Later  Historical  Books— Chronicles  to  Esther      .    107 

I.  Titles,  Divisions,  and  Mutual  Relations  of  Chron.-Ezra- 
Neh.  2.  Date  and  Authorship  of  Chron.-Ezra-Neh.  3.  Sources 
of  Chron.  4.  Contents  of  Chron.  5.  Historical  Character  and 
Teaching  of  Chron.  6.  Use  of  Chron.  in  N.T.  7.  Sources  of 
Ezra-Neh.  8.  Historical  Accuracy  of  Ezra-Neh.  9.  Contents 
of  Ezra-Neh.     10.  Esther. 


BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 


CHAPTER  IV. 

PAGB 

The  Poetical  Books        .  .  .  .       .    123 

I.  Job.  2.  Psalms.  3.  Proverbs.  4.  Ecclesiastes.  5.  Song 
of  Songs. 

CHAPTER  V. 
Isaiah-Daniel     .  .  .  .       .    171 

I.  Our  Book  of  Isaiah,  with  General  Analysis.  2.  Isaiah 
i.-xxxv.  3.  Isaiah  xxxvi.-xxxix.  4.  Introduction  to  Isaiah 
xl.-lxvi.  5.  Isaiah  xl.-lv.  6.  Isaiah  Ivi.-lxvi.  7,  Jeremiah. 
8.  Lamentations.    9.  Ezekiel.     10.  Daniel. 


CHAPTER  VI. 
The  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets         .  ,       .   234 

I.  Introductory.  2.  Hosea.  3.  Joel,  4.  Amos.  5.  Obadiah. 
6.  Jonah.  7.  Micah.  8.  Nahum.  9.  Habakkuk.  10.  Zephaniah. 
II.  Haggai.  12.  Zechariah  i.-viii.  13.  Zechariah  ix.-xiv. 
14.  Malachi. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

Apocrypha,  Pseudepigrapha,  and  some  other  Jewish 
Literature  not  included  in  the  Protestant 
Canon  .  .  .  ...   268 

I.  Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  including  Epistle  of  Baruch. 
2.  Ascension  of  Isaiah.  3.  Assumption  of  Moses.  4.  Baruch, 
Book  of.  5.  Daniel,  Song  of  the  Three  Children,  Bel  and  the 
Dragon,  Susanna.  6.  Ecclesiasticus.  7.  Enoch,  Book  of. 
8.  Enoch,  Book  of  the  Secrets  of.  9.  I.  or  III.  Esdras. 
10.  II.  or  IV.  Esdras.  11.  Esther.  12.  Jeremiah,  Letter 
of.  13.  Josephus.  14.  Jubilees,  Book  of.  15.  Judith. 
16.  i.  Maccabees.  17.  il  Maccabees.  18.  iii.  Maccabees. 
19.  iv.  Maccabees.  20.  Manasseh,  Prayer  of.  21.  Philo. 
22.  Psalms  of  Solomon.  23.  Sibyllines.  24.  Testament  of 
the  Twelve  Patriarchs.     25.  Tobit.    26.  Wisdom  of  Solomon. 


TABLE   OF  CONTENTS  xi 


NEW   TESTAMENT 

PAGB 

Introductory     .  .  .  ...    275 


CHAPTER  I. 
The  Synoptic  Gospels     .  .  .  .       .   277 

I.  The  Gospels.     2.  Matthew.     3.  Mark.    4.  Luke. 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  Synoptic  Problem    .  .  .  .       .   316 

I.  Resemblances.  2.  Differences.  3.  Proposed  Explanations. 
4.  Probable  Conclusions. 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  Fourth  Gospel         .  .  .  .       .   328 

I.  Authorship  and  Historicity.  2.  Time  and  Place  of  Writing. 
3.  Contents.    4.  Characteristics. 

CHAPTER  IV. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  .  .  .       .   341 

I.  Authorship.  2.  Historicity.  3.  Date.  4.  Contents,  5.  Aim 
and  Characteristics. 

CHAPTER  V. 
The  Pauline  Epistles— First  Group         .  .       .   349 

I.  The  Thirteen  Epistles.  2.  The  Thessalonian  Christians. 
3.  I  Thessalonians.     4.  2  Thessalonians. 

CHAPTER  VI. 
The  Pauline  Epistles— Second  Group      .  .       .   361 

I.  The  Church  at  Corinth.  2.  The  Question  of  a  Lost 
Epistle.  3.  I  Corinthians.  4.  2  Corinthians.  5.  Galatians. 
6.  Romans.     7.  Characteristics  of  the  Group. 


xii  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

CHAPTER  VII. 

The  Pauline  Epistles— Third  Group— The  Epistles 
Written  in  Prison    .  .  .  .       •    387 

The  Place  and  Time  of  Imprisonment.  1.  Colossians. 
2.  Philemon.  3.  Ephesians.  4.  Philippians.  5.  Characteristics 
of  the  Group. 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

Fourth  Group— The  Pastoral  Epistles   .  .       .   406 

I.  The  question  of  genuineness.  2.  i  Timothy.  3.  2  Timothy. 
4.  Titus. 

CHAPTER  IX. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews       .  .  .       .   421 

I.  Who  was  the  Author— Paul,  Luke,  Clement,  ApoUos, 
Barnabas  ?  2.  Date  and  Place  of  Writing.  3.  The  Church 
Addressed.  4.  Occasion  of  Writing.  5.  Contents.  6.  Argument. 

CHAPTER  X. 

General  Epistles  .  .  ...   434 

I.  James.  2.  l  Peter.  3.  2  Peter.  4.  Jude.  5.  i  John. 
6.  2  John.     7.  3  John. 

CHAPTER  XL 
The  Revelation  .  .  .  ...   460 

1.  Apocalyptic  Literature.  2.  Authorship  and  Origin.  History 
of  Criticism.  Date.  3.  Contents.  4.  Structure  and  Interpreta- 
tion. 

APPENDICES 

A.  Early  Witnesses  to  New  Testament  Writings.  469 

B.  Hammurabi  (Amraphel)  .  .  .       .  471 

C.  Wisdom  Literature  .  .  ...  472 

D.  The  Recent  Criticism  of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  473 

List  of  Books     .  .  .  ...    474 

Index     .  .  .  ...    486 


BIBLICAL    INTRODUCTION 

CHAPTER   I. 
INTRODUCTORY   TO   OLD   TESTAMENT 

1.  MSS.  and  Versions  I  3.  History  of  Criticism 

2.  External  Evidence  I  4.  Canon 

I.  Text,  MSS.,  and  Versions.^ — The  two  main  authorities 
for  the  text  of  the  O.T.  are  the  Masoretic  edition  and  the 
Septuagint.  The  Masoretic  edition  is  extant  in  the  numerous 
MSS.^  and  printed  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Text.  The  two 
oldest  MSS.  are  one  of  the  Pentateuch,  which  Dr.  Ginsburg 
dates  A.D.  820-850,  in  the  British  Museum;  and  one  at 
St.  Petersburg,  dated  by  its  own  scribe  a.d.  916,  and  con- 
taining Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the  Twelve.  The 
oldest  MS.  of  the  whole  Bible  mentioned  by  Ginsburg  was 
written  c.  a.d.  1230. 

The  various  readings  are  comparatively  unimportant,  and 
the  substantial  agreement  of  so  many  MSS.  confirms  the 
statements  that,  long  before  a.d.  800,  the  accurate  transmission 
of  the  Hebrew  Text  had  been  safeguarded  by  a  number  of 
ingenious  and  efficacious  devices.  The  present  consonantal 
text  was  probably  fixed,  and  as  it  were  stereotyped,  during  the 
first  three  centuries  after  Christ.  The  vowel-points  were 
added  later.     The  "Square  Hebrew,"  however,  of  our  MSS. 

*  Cy.  §  2  on  External  Evidence. 

»  Kennicott  collated  581  MSS.  of  the  whole  or  part  of  the  O.T.— 
Smith's  Bible  Diet,,  art.  "Old  Testament."  Ginsburg,  Introduction  to 
the  Ileb.  Bible^  describes  60  of  the  most  important. 


2  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

and  printed  copies  is  really  the  Aramaic  script  adopted  by 
the  Jews  some  time  after  the  Exile.  The  character  previously 
used  by  Israelite  writers  was  that  of  the  Moabite  stone. 
Moreover,  in  the  ancient  writings  themselves  the  use  of  weak 
consonants  for  vowels  only  occurs  to  a  very  limited  extent. 
Thus  our  present  pointed  text  has  been  obtained  from  the 
original,  by  transcription  from  the  old  into  the  square  Hebrew, 
by  the  insertion  of  weak  consonants  to  do  duty  as  vowels, 
and  by  the  addition  of  vowel-points.  The  comparative 
uniformity  of  existing  MSS.  suggests  that,  at  some  stage 
in  the  formation  of  the  text,  the  editors  constituted  one 
MS.  an  archetype  for  subsequent  copies,  and  suppressed  all 
the  earlier  MSS.  which  differed  from  it.  The  margins  of  our 
MSS.  and  some  other  Jewish  authorities  preserve  a  number 
of  comparatively  unimportant  various  readings,  besides  those 
obtained  by  a  comparison  of  the  MSS.  themselves. 

The  Samaritans  have  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch  in  a  form 
of  the  old  Hebrew  character;  it  is  claimed  that  some  of 
these  belong  to  the  first  four  centuries  of  the  Christian 
era.  The  differences  between  these  MSS.  and  those  of  the 
Masoretic  edition  do  not  substantially  affect  the  text. 

The  other  main  authority  is  the  Septuagint  or  Greek  version, 
which  was  made  at  Alexandria  at  different  times  by  various 
translators.  The  Pentateuch  was  probably  translated  in  the 
reign  of  Ptolemy  II.  (Philadelphus),  B.C.  285-246,  and  the 
prologue  to  Ecclesiasticus  shows  that  a  Greek  translation  of 
the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  other  books  existed  in  b.c.  130. 
The  Septuagint  was  probably  completed  before  the  Christian 
era,  but  we  do  not  know  the  exact  date.  This  version  is 
extant  in  numerous  MSS.,  apparently  all  derived  from 
Christian  sources;  the  oldest  and  most  important  are  the 
Vatican  and  Sinaitic,^  which  also  contain  the  N.T.  The 
differences  of  reading  discovered  by  comparing  the  MSS. 
of  the  Septuagint  with  each  other  and  with  those  of  the 
Hebrew  Text  are  numerous  and  important. 

Probably  the  Targums,  or  oral  Aramaic  translations  given 
*  BN,  both  of  the  fourth  century  a.  d. 


EXTERNAL   EVIDENCE  3 

in  the  synagogues  after  the  reading  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures, 
existed  in  a  kind  of  oral  edition  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Christian  era;  but  the  extant  Targums  were  not  committed 
to  writing  till  a  much  later  date. 

The  Babylonian  Targums,  that  of  the  Law  named  after  Onkelos,  that 
of  the  Prophets  after  Jonathan  ben  Uzziel,  belong  to  the  second  and  third 
centuries  A.D.  The  Palestinian  Targums,  viz.,  the  two  on  the  Law,  the 
Jerusalem  Targum  and  that  of  Pseudo -Jonathan,  and  the  rest  are  later. 

Greek  translations  by  Symmachus,  Aquila,  and  Theodotion 
were  made  in  the  second  century  a.d.  With  the  exception  of 
Theodotion's  Daniel  only  fragments  are  preserved. 

The  Old  Latin  Version,  second  century  a.d.,  was  made 
from  the  Septuagint,  which  also  largely  influenced  the  Peshito 
or  Syriac  Version,  second  or  third  century.  Jerome's  Vulgate, 
c.  A.D.  400,  is  a  very  thorough  revision  from  the  Hebrew  of 
the  Old  Latin  Version. 

2.  External  Evidence.^ — As  the  external  evidence  concern- 
ing the  date  and  authorship  of  the  books  of  the  O.T.  mostly 
refers  to  the  whole  collection,  it  is  convenient  to  give  a  sketch 
of  it  here.  The  oldest  MSS.  of  the  Hebrew  Text  show  us 
that  the  Hebrew  Text  now  current,  from  which  E.V.  is 
translated,  was  known  about  a.d.  800-1000,  />.,  that  all  the 
books  of  the  O.T.  were  then  extant  in  their  present  form. 
The  oldest  MSS.  of  the  LXX.  show  us  that  they  were  all 
extant  in  substantially  ^  their  present  form  about  a.d.  300-400. 
Further,  the  accounts  given  of  the  Synod  of  Jamnia  show 
that  all  the  books  existed  at  the  close  of  the  first  century 
A.D.,  and  the  numerous  quotations  in  the  N.T.  mostly  agree 
either  with  the  LXX.  or  the  Hebrew  Text,  from  which  we 
infer  that  the  books  quoted  in  the  N.T.  existed  then  in  sub- 
stantially the  same  form  as  that  in  which  they  are  found 
in  the  LXX.  and  the  Hebrew.  These  books  comprise  all  the 
O.T.  except  Joshua^  Judges^  Chronicles^  Canticles^  Ecclesiastes^ 
Ezra^  Nehemiahy  Esther^  Obadiah^  Zephaniah^  Nahum,^  Philo 

^  On  Internal  Evidence  see  chap.  ii.  §  ii. 

2  The  differences  are  appreciable. 

•  Westcott,  Bible  in  the  Churchy  p.  43. 


4  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

and  Josephus  confirm  our  inference  as  to  the  books  used  in 
N.T.,  and  enable  us  to  extend  it  to  the  other  books  of  O.T., 
with  two  possible  exceptions,  Ecclesiastes  and  Canticles, 

We  can  add  from  Philo,  Joshua^  Judges^  and  Chronicles. 
Josephus'  history  shows  his  acquaintance  with  all  the  historical 
books.  In  his  account  of  the  Scriptures  ^  he  states  that  there 
are  only  twenty-two  sacred  books :  the  five  books  of  Moses, 
thirteen  books  by  the  prophets  containing  the  history  from 
Moses  to  Artaxerxes,  and  four  books  containing  hymns  to 
God  and  practical  directions  to  men.  The  thirteen  are 
perhaps :  (i)  Joshua^  (2)  Judges  and  Euthy  (3)  Saj?iuel, 
(4)  Kings^  (5)  Isaiah^  (6)  Jeremiah  and  Lamentations^ 
(7)  Ezekiel,  (8)  The  Book  of  the  Tivelve  Prophets, 
(9)  Chronicles,  (10)  Ezra  and  Nchemiah,  (11)  Esther, 
(12)  Daniel,  (13)  Job:  and  the  four.  Psalms,  Proverbs^ 
Canticles,  Ecclesiastes,  2 

It  would,  however,  be  quite  possible  to  reckon  Ruth  and 
Lamentations  as  separate  books,  to  place  Job  and  Lamenta- 
tions among  the  four,  and  extrude  Ecclesiastes  and  Canticles.^ 

There  is  no  certain  trace  in  Josephus  of  his  acquaintance 
with  these  two  books,  and  his  Hst  and  classification  do 
not  prove  that  he  was  acquainted  with  them.  Perhaps  this 
master  of  craft  and  subtlety  was  intentionally  ambiguous  in 
view  of  the  conflicting  views  of  the  Rabbis. 

The  fact  that  the  LXX.  contains  all  the  O.T.  shows  that 
all  the  books  were  written  before  the  LXX.  was  completed, 
i.e.,  according  to  common  opinion,  before  the  beginning 
of  the  Christian  era.  Unfortunately  this  opinion,  though 
probably  correct,  is  not  at  present  susceptible  of  formal 
proof. 

The  prologue  to  the  Greek  translation  of  Ecclesiasticus 
speaks  of  "  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  and  the  other  books  " 
as  known  to  the  author,  a  passage  which  shows  that  the  Law 
and  the  Prophets  and  some  other  sacred  books  were  known  to 


*  Contra  Apion,  i.  7-9. 
2  Buhl,  Canon,  p.  19. 

*  Grdtz  ap.  Buhl,  p.  19. 


EXTERNAL   EVIDENCE  5 

the  translator,  B.C.  130,  and  probably  to  his  grandfather,  the 
author,  B.C.  180  j  but  they  by  no  means  prove  that  the 
Hagiographa  or  Kethtlbhim,  the  third  and  latest  section  of 
the  Hebrew  Canon,  then  included  all  the  books  which  it 
ultimately  embraced.  On  the  contrary,  the  list  of  worthies, 
xliv.-xlix.  implies  the  author's  acquaintance  with  all  the  books 
of  the  "  Law  "  and  the  "  Prophets  " ;  but,  of  the  Hagiographa, 
only  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Psalms  are  referred  to. 

The  story  that  the  Law  was  translated  into  Greek  by 
seventy-two  Jews^  for  Ptolemy  (Philadelphus),  B.C.  284-246, 
is  extant  in  a  letter,  the  Epistle  of  the  Pseudo-Aristeas,  which 
is  perhaps  as  old  as  B.C.  200;  if  so,  the  main  fact,  the 
translation  of  the  Law  into  Greek  c.  B.C.  250,  may  probably 
be  accepted;  and  we  have  external  evidence  of  the  existence 
of  the  complete  Pentateuch  at  that  date.^ 

The  Samaritans  possess  ancient  Hebrew  MSS.  ^  of  the 
Pentateuch  in  a  modification  of  the  old  Hebrew  character. 
Probably  the  Samaritans  obtained  and  accepted  the  Penta- 
teuch not  long  after  their  establishment  of  a  schismatic 
Judaism.  This  was  certainly  not  earlier  than  the  reforms 
of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  B.C.  444.  Our  information  concern- 
ing the  history  of  the  Samaritans  is  too  fragmentary  and 
ambiguous  to  enable  us  to  fix  exactly  the  date  at  which 
they  received  the  Pentateuch;  but  it  points  to  the  existence 
of  the  Pentateuch  before  B.C.  300. 

Thus  the  evidence  outside  of  the  O.T.  itself  shows  that  the 
Pentateuch  was  in  existence  before  B.C.  300 ;  Joshua,  Judges, 
Samuel,  Kings,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  the  Book  of  the 
Twelve  Prophets,  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Psalms 
before  b.c.  180;  the  rest  of  the  O.T.  before  the  beginning 
of  the  Christian  era.  The  proof,  however,  is  not  quite 
absolute  from  external  evidence  alone  in  the  case  of  Eccle- 
siastes  and  Canticles.  But,  even  as  a  matter  of  external 
evidence,  these  two  books  could  not  be  much  later.       Jj^ 

^  Hence  the  title  Septuagint. 

^  Buhl,  p.  no. 

*  Some  probably  as  old  as  a.d.  400. 


6  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

The  LXX.  and  the  Hebrew  Text  have  reached  us  along 
independent  lines  of  transmission.  The  differences  between 
them,  though  numerous  and  important,  do  not  seriously  affect 
O.T.  history  and  teaching.  This  agreement  shows  us  that 
our  O.T.  existed  substantially  as  we  now  have  it  before  the 
Christian  era.^ 

External  evidence  as  to  authorship  is  necessarily  slighter 
and  less  definite.  A  reference  to  a  book  is  proof  of  its 
existence  at  the  time  when  the  reference  was  made,  and 
fixes  a  limit  to  the  period  within  which  it  can  have  been 
composed.  But  a  statement  as  to  authorship  merely  conveys 
the  opinion  of  the  person  who  makes  it,  and  when  he  lived 
centuries  after  the  book  was  written  his  opinion  carries  little 
weight,  unless  it  can  be  shown — not  merely  assumed — that  he 
connects  with  the  book  through  a  satisfactory  series  of  inter- 
mediate authorities.  Revelation,  of  course,  might  have  given 
N.T.  writers  direct  information  on  such  subjects,  or  our  Lord 
might  have  made  statements  as  to  the  date  and  authorship  of 
the  Jewish  Scriptures  part  of  His  message  to  the  world.  But 
neither  Christ  nor  the  inspired  writers  declare  that  such  matters 
are  part  of  the  Revelation  made  by  Him  or  through  them. 

Our  Hebrew  and  Greek  MSS.  show  that  in  N.T.  times 
the  books  already  bore  their  present  titles,  and  they  are 
referred  to  under  these  tides  in  the  N.T.  and  elsewhere. 
But  such  references  are  not  equivalent  to  expressions  of 
opinion  as  to  authorship.  For  instance,  "  Matthew  says, 
etc."  merely  means  to-day  "The  First  Gospel  says,  etc."; 
the  personal  name  "  Matthew "  is  used  as  a  title  for  the 
book,  without  any  intention  of  stating  a  conviction  as  to 
authorship.  Thus  Calvin  does  not  hold  2  Peter  to  be  the 
work  of  the  apostle,  but  expressly  justifies  the  referring  to 
it  as  "Peter,"  because  he  believes  it  to  be  consistent  with 
his  teaching. 2    Similarly,  Origen  says  of  the  Epistle  to  the 

^  The  addilions  in  the  LXX.  do  not  affect  this  evidence. 

^  So  Dr.  Currey  writes  in  the  S.P.C.K.  commentary  on  Ecclesiastes, 
1878  :  **  Commentators  have  in  general  spoken  of  the  contents  of  this  book 
as  the  words  of  Solomon,  without  intending  thereby  to  express  any  precise 
opinion  of  its  authorship  and  date." 


EXTERNAL   EVIDENCE  7 

Hebrews  that  "  God  only  knows  who  wrote  it,"  yet  in  his 
writings  he  freely  quotes  it  as  "Paul's."^  Hence  unless 
a  writer  or  speaker  makes  it  clear  that  he  is  intending  to 
state  an  authoritative  judgment  as  to  the  authorship  of  a 
book,  quotations  from  *' Moses,"  or  "David,"  or  "Kings" 
merely  mean  that  the  passages  are  taken  from  the  books 
bearing  these  titles.  Our  leading  authorities  are  for  the 
most  part  singularly  wanting  in  explicit  statements  as  to 
the  authorship  of  O.T.  books.  The  N.T.  lays  little  stress 
upon  authorship;  in  the  majority  of  its  quotations  it  does 
not  think  it  worth  while  to  mention  any  author's  name; 
it  is  not  careful  to  confine  the  term  "David"  to  Psalms 
bearing  Davidic  titles,  but  extends  it  to  the  anonymous 
Psalms  ii.  and  xcv.^  In  some  cases  the  authors'  names 
connected  with  quotations  in  the  N.T.  differ  from  the  titles 
of  the  O.T.  books  from  which  they  are  taken.^ 

It  is  not  that  the  N.T.  writers  intended  to  give  an  inspired 
contradiction  of  the  O.T.,  but  that  they  were  indifferent, 
and  did  not  claim  to  deliver  inspired  messages  on  these 
subjects. 

The  most  explicit  statement  is  the  well-known  Talmudic 
passage,  which  probably  represents  the  current  opinion  of  the 
Rabbis  at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era.*  It  runs  as 
follows : — "  But  who  wrote  (the  books  of  the  Bible)  ?  Moses 
wrote  his  own  book  (and)  the  section  about  Balaam,  and  Job. 
Joshua  wrote  his  own  book  and  (the  last)  eight  verses  of  the 
Pentateuch.      Samuel  wrote  his  own  book  (and)  the  books 

^  e.g.y  Against  Celsus,  chap.  liii. 

*  Acts  iv.  25  ;  Heb.  iv.  7. 

'  In  Mark  i.  2,  3,  R.V.,  Mai.  iii.  I,  +  Isaiah  xl.  3  is  (^[uoted  as 
** written  in  the  prophet  Isaiah";  in  Matt,  xxvii.  9,  Zech.  xi.  12,  13 
are  referred  to  as  "spoken  by  Jeremiah  the  prophet" ;  probably  elsewhere 
the  names  of  authors  of  quotations  have  been  inserted  by  scribes,  much  as 
references  are  written  or  printed  in  English  Bibles.  Thus  the  name 
*'  Daniel"  given  in  Matt.  xxiv.  15  is  absent  from  Mark,  R.V.,  and  Luke; 
and  "Jeremiah  "  is  omitted  by  some  authorities  in  Matt.  ii.  17. 

*  Babylonian  Talmud,  Baba  Bathra,  f.  14  b.  Though  this  edition  of 
the  Talmud  was  composed  about  a.d.  500,  the  passage  in  question  is  a 
"baraitha,"  or  early  tradition  from  the  age  of  the  Mishna,  i.e.)  the  second 
century  a.d.    Buhl,  Canon,  p.  5. 


8  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

of  Judges  and  Ruth.  David  wrote  the  book  of  Psalms  by 
the  ten  venerable  elders,  Adam  the  first  man,  Melchizedek, 
Abraham,  Moses,  Haman,  Jeduthun,  Asaph,  and  the  three 
sons  of  Korah.  Jeremiah  wrote  his  own  book,  the  books 
of  Kings  and  Lamentations.  Hezekiah  and  his  friends  (wrote 
the  books  included  in)  the  mnemonic  book  Y.a.M.Sh.a.Q.,  />., 
Isaiah  {YeshaydMi),  Proverbs  {Meshdlivi)^  Canticles  {Shir 
hash-Shtrhn),  and  Ecclesiastes  {Qoheleth).  The  Men  of  the 
Great  Synagogue  (wrote  the  books  included  in)  the  mnemonic 
word  HaNDaG,  />.,  Ezekiel  (ye  Hezkel),  the  Twelve  {Neb- 
Mhn),  Daniel,  and  Esther.  Ezra  wrote  his  own  book  and 
continued  the  genealogies  of  the  books  of  Chronicles  down 
to  his  own  times.  .  .  .  But  who  completed  them  (the  books 
of  Chronicles)  ?     Nehemiah  ben  Hachaliah." 

Clearly,  "  wrote  "  cannot  be  used  here  of  the  literary  com- 
position of  our  present  books.  The  Book  of  Joshua  narrates 
the  death  of  Joshua ;  the  Book  of  Samuel  narrates  the  whole 
reign  of  David,  while  Samuel  died  before  his  accession.  The 
Great  Synagogue,  if  it  existed  at  all,  was  a  post-exilic  institu- 
tion, and  the  Talmud  could  not  mean  that  Amos  and  Hosea 
were  post-exilic.  Note,  too,  that  David's  "writing"  of  the 
Psalms  does  not  exclude  **  ten  venerable  elders  "  from  a  share 
in  the  work.  The  inevitable  conclusion  is  that  when  the  Jews 
of  our  Lord's  time  spoke  of  anyone  "writing"  a  book,  they 
used  the  term  in  a  very  elastic  sense;  either  of  preparing 
the  final  edition  which  took  its  place  in  the  Canon,  or  of 
having  some  connection  with  the  book,  as  being  its  hero, 
and  the  author  of  part  of  its  contents.  Similarly,  although 
Ecclus.  xliv.-xlix.  implies  that,  in  the  author's  time,  the 
books  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  bore  their  present  titles, 
it  does  not  assert  that  the  persons  mentioned  in  the  titles 
were  the  literary  authors  of  the  books  in  their  present  form. 
Even  Philo  and  Josephus,  who  dilate  on  Moses'  gifts  as  a 
legislator,  and  speak  of  him  as  prophesying  his  death  and 
burial,  lay  little  stress  on  his  actual  literary  authorship. 

There  is  a  story  in  Fourth  Esdras,  c.  a.d.  90-100,  that  the 
Law  was  burnt,  and  that  Ezra  was  inspired  to  dictate  afresh 


GENERAL  COURSE  OF  CRITICISM        9 

ninety-four  books  to  five  scribes,  seventy  of  which  were 
reserved  for  scholars  and  twenty-four  published.^  This  strange 
legend  seems  to  point  to  a  tradition  of  an  extensive  post-exilic 
revision  of  the  Law  and  the  rest  of  the  O.T. 

Thus  the  external  evidence  as  to  authorship  shows  that  the 
books  of  the  O.T.  had  their  present  titles  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Christian  era,  and  that  the  Law  and  the  Prophets 
(including  Joshua  to  2  Kings,  less  Ruth)  had  such  titles 
about  B.C.  200  j  and  that  the  Pentateuch  existed  in  its  present 
form  c,  B.C.  300.  Further,  Moses  and  others  named  in  such 
titles  are  often  spoken  of  as  in  some  sense  authors  of  the 
books  to  which  their  names  are  attached,  but  the  extant 
evidence  suggests  that  they  may  not  always  have  been  credited 
with  the  literary  authorship  of  these  books  in  their  present 
form.  Otherwise,  our  authorities  seem  to  have  had  no  in- 
formation on  the  subject  but  that  given  by  the  titles  and 
other  contents  of  the  O.T.  Practically,  therefore,  we  are 
left  to  determine  the  date  and  authorship  of  the  books  from 
the  same  evidence. 

3.  The  General  Course  of  Criticism.  It  follows,  from  what 
has  been  maintained  in  the  section  on  External  Evidence, 
that  there  is  nothing  to  show  either  that  Jewish  views  as  to 
date  and  authorship  were  based  on  any  careful  and  thorough 
investigations,  or  even  that  their  statements  are  intended  to 
ascribe  literary  authorship  to  the  persons  whose  names  they 
use  as  titles  of  books.  The  Pentateuch,  for  instance,  might 
be  called  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  carry  his  authority,  even 
if  it  was  not  composed  by  him ;  it  represented  his  teaching 
and  his  spirit.  Thus  the  criticism  of  our  books  had  not 
really  begun  when  the  Church  took  over  the  O.T.  from  the 
Synagogue.  With  the  books,  the  Church  also  took  the  titles, 
and  the  loose  understanding  that  the  personal  titles  were, 
as  far  as  possible,  to  be  interpreted  as  ascriptions  of  author- 
ship.     With  slight  exceptions,  there  was  no  inquiry  into  the 

1  xiv.  19-48  ;  the  book  is  called  2  Esdras  in  the  English  version  of  the 
Apocrypha.  The  twenty-four  published  books  are  probably  those  of  the 
O.T.,  which  were  often  reckoned  as  twenty-four. 


10  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

evidence  of  date  and  authorship.  The  intellect  of  Christian 
scholars  was  preoccupied  with  the  Canon  and  criticism  of 
the  N.T.,  and  with  the  construction  of  a  system  of  theology. 
Meanwhile,  popular  usage  hardened  into  definite  and  rigid 
shape  the  traditional  views  taken  over  from  the  Rabbis. 
Lapse  of  time  gave  the  authority  of  prescription  to  what 
had  merely  been  accepted  by  an  otiose  assent;  and,  through- 
out the  Middle  Ages,  the  cruel  weight  of  ecclesiastical 
intolerance  effectually  crushed  any  movement  to  reopen  a 
question  which  both  the  Church  and  the  Synagogue  were 
supposed  to  have  settled.  Nevertheless,  here  and  there,  a 
passage  of  a  father,  like  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  or  of  a 
Rabbi,  like  Ibn  Ezra,  shows  that  the  objections  to  the 
traditional  views  were  patent  to  competent  scholars  who  were 
also  independent  thinkers. 

The  Reformation  promised,  at  first,  to  liberate  criticism; 
Luther  and  Calvin  were  the  pioneers  of  modern  biblical 
criticism;  they  set  aside  traditional  views  on  some  points 
connected  with  the  Apocrypha  and  minor  O.T.  books.  But 
history  repeated  itself,  the  Protestant  leaders  were  mainly 
occupied  with  the  revolution  in  Church  government  and 
the  reconstruction  of  theology.  The  traditional  views  which 
the  Primitive  Church  had  accepted  by  otiose  assent  from  the 
Rabbis,  the  Protestants  again  accepted,  with  little  change, 
from  the  Church  of  Rome.  About  this  period,  and  before 
and  after,  Spinoza,  Grotius,  and  others,  besides  the  great 
reformers,  made  beginnings  of  O.T.  criticism  in  various 
directions;  but  there  was  no  comprehensive  or  thorough 
investigation  into  the  date  and  authorship  of  the  respective 
books.  The  movement  towards  inquiry  was  checked,  and, 
in  the  absence  of  any  emphatic  challenge,  it  came  to  be 
supposed  that  the  traditional  views  were  part  of  the  body 
of  Christian  truth,  which  Protestants  held  in  common  with 
the  Church  of  Rome. 

It  was  only  towards  the  close  of  the  last  century  that  the 
principles  of  the  Reformation  began  to  be  systematically 
applied  to  O.T.  criticism.     Since  then,  the  question  of  the 


GENERAL  COURSE  OF  CRITICISM      ii 

date,  authorship,  etc.,  of  all  the  books  of  the  O.T.  has  been 
carefully  examined.  The  process  has  been  long,  laborious,  and 
difficult,  and  is  by  no  means  completed.  Two  special  causes 
have  added  to  the  difficulty,  (i)  In  most  cases,  and  till 
recently  in  all  cases,  the  scholars  engaged  in  this  task  were 
trained  to  take  the  traditional  views  for  granted,  and  to  assume 
that  they  were  always  supported  by  conclusive  evidence. 
When  a  scholar  was  engaged  in  a  fresh  and  independent 
examination  of  some  one  subject,  on  all  other  subjects  he 
was  almost  obliged  to  assume  the  traditional  views,  which 
had  moulded  all  his  habits  of  thought  on  the  O.T.  Hence 
the  first  solutions  proposed  often  blend  the  assumptions  of 
tradition  and  the  results  of  criticism  in  the  most  curious 
fashion.  (2)  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  soon  discovered  that, 
in  many  cases,  the  strong  evidence  supposed  to  support  the 
older  views  simply  did  not  exist ;  and  that  what  seemed  to  be 
evidence  was  often  quite  irrelevant.  Hence  there  arose  a 
tendency  to  reject  both  views  and  evidence  in  too  wholesale 
a  fashion.  For  these  two  reasons  results  have  had  to  be 
revised  and  reconsidered  again  and  again.  But  there  are 
signs  that  something  like  finality  is  being  reached  as  to  the 
main  facts ;  although  in  dealing  with  a  very  ancient  literature 
chiefly  by  internal  evidence,  results  must  always  be  approxi- 
mate, there  will  always  be  a  broad  margin  of  uncertainty, 
within  which  different  scholars  will  arrive  at  different  results. 

There  has  also  been  a  third  difficulty.  Naturally,  anxiety 
has  been  felt  lest  the  processes  and  results  of  criticism  should 
weaken  the  authority  of  the  Bible,  and  undermine  the  founda- 
tions of  essential  Christian  doctrines.  Now,  however,  the 
new  positions  have  met  with  widespread  acceptance  for  more 
than  a  generation,  and  experience  shows  that  ministers  and 
Christians  generally  hold  such  positions  without  losing  any- 
thing of  their  fulness  of  spiritual  life,  or  of  their  zeal  and 
success  in  the  service  of  their  Master. 

In  many  respects,  especially  in  the  Prophetical  Books, 
criticism  has  substantially  confirmed  traditional  views  ^  in 
many    other   matters   those    views    have    been    considerably 


12  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

modified,  or  even  entirely  set  aside.  The  general  result, 
however,  tends  not  to  weaken,  but  to  strengthen,  the  spiritual 
authority  and  value  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  very  general  statement  given  above  would  apply  to  almost  all 
schools  of  criticism.  Some  scholars,  however,  believe  that  the  ultimate 
results  of  criticism  will  be  much  more  in  accordance  with  traditional  views 
than  the  position  taken  in  the  O.T.  section  of  this  book.  Cf.  Preface  and 
Appendix  on  Literature. 

4.  Canon. — The  idea  of  a  Canon,  or  collection  of  books 
distinguished  from  all  others  by  unique  inspiration  and 
religious  authority,  was  fully  established  among  the  Jews 
before  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era.  Yet  there  was 
not  unanimity  as  to  the  exact  list  of  canonical  books.  The 
Hebrew  collection  of  sacred  books  was  less  numerous  than 
that  used  by  Greek-speaking  Jews.  Even  amongst  Palestinian 
Jews  the  canonicity  of  Ezekiel,  Ecclesiastes,  Ruth,  Esther, 
Proverbs,  and  Canticles  was  still  discussed  in  the  first  century 
A.D.  But  the  Synod  of  Jamnia,  c.  a.d.  90,  seems  to  have 
fixed  the  Canon  of  the  Hebrew  O.T.  as  we  now  have  it; 
and  this  Canon  was  confirmed  by  the  Mishna,  c.  a.d.  200. 
The  O.T.  as  published,  so  to  speak,  by  the  Masoretic  editors, 
not  earlier  than  about  a.d.  150,  and  as  printed  in  our  Hebrew 
Bibles,  consists  of  three  parts : — 

(i.)  Tor  ally  or  Pentateuch, 
(ii.)  NebhVim,  or  Prophets. 

(a)    NehhVim    RVshbnim^    or    First    Volume    of    the 

Prophets,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  Kings. 
{h)    NebhVlm  ^Ahdronim^  or   Second  Volume  of  the 
Prophets,!  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,   Ezekiel,  and  the 
Twelve. 

(iii.)  KetMibhim^  or  Hagiographa,  Chronicles,  Psalms, 
Job,  Proverbs,  Daniel,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah; 
and  the  five  festival  rolls,  or  Megilioth,  Ruth, 
Canticles,  Ecclesiastes,  Lamentations,  and  Esther. 

^  Another,  less  probable,  explanation  of  (a)  and  {b)  is  •*  earlier  "  and 
"later  prophets." 


CANON  13 

This  grouping  is  recognised  in  the  N.T.  in  the  frequent 
references  to  "the  Law  and  the  Prophets,"^  and  once  to 
"the  Law  of  Moses,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Psalms." ^ 
Similarly  the  prologue  to  Ecclesiasticus  speaks  of  the  Law, 
the  Prophets,  and  the  other  books  of  our  fathers.  Thus  the 
two  first  sections  of  the  Canon,  the  Law  and  the  Prophets, 
seem  fully  accepted  in  their  present  form  before  B.C.  130,  and 
almost  certainly  before  B.C.  200.  The  canonical  status  of 
the  Pentateuch  is  implied  in  Chronicles,  b.c.  300-250;  the 
priestly  code  became  canonical  under  Ezra  and  Nehemiah; 
the  kernel  of  Deuteronomy  under  Josiah. 

So  far  we  have  been  dealing  with  the  Canon  of  the 
Palestinian  Rabbis.  Although  the  canonicity  of  some  of 
our  O.T.  books  was  matter  for  discussion,  no  serious  attempt 
seems  to  have  been  made  to  include  in  the  Jewish  Canon  any 
books  not  contained  in  our  O.T.  The  Alexandrine  and  other 
Hellenistic  Jews,  however,  had  a  wider  canon,  including,  in 
addition  to  all  the  books  of  our  O.T.,  our  Apocrypha,  viz., 
the  additions  to  Esther,  the  additions  to  Daniel  (i.e.,  the  Song 
of  the  Three  Holy  Children,  Susanna,  and  Bel  and  the 
Dragon),  Baruch,  the  Epistle  of  Jeremiah,  the  Prayer  of 
Manasses,  Esdras,  i  and  2  Maccabees,  Ecclesiasticus,  and 
the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  Judith,  and  Tobit. 

Although  we  have  no  early  express  statements  that  the 
Hellenistic  Jews  had  this  wider  canon,  two  considerations 
point  to  its  existence :  (i.)  In  the  existing  MSS.  of  the 
Septuagint  the  Apocrypha  are  not  collected  in  a  final 
appendix,  but  are  distributed  amongst  the  other  books 
as  if  of  equal  authority.  Although  all  these  MSS.  are 
Christian,  the  arrangement  is  probably  borrowed  from  the 
Hellenistic  Jews,  (ii.)  The  Apocrypha  were  often  included 
in  the  Christian  Canon.  Now  Christian  scholars  who  refused 
to  accept  any  but  our  O.T.  books,  did  so  on  the  authority 
of  the  Palestinian  Jews.  Probably,  therefore,  those  who 
accepted  a  wider  canon  also  followed  Jewish  authority — in 
this  case,  the  opinions  and  customs  of  the  Hellenistic  Jews. 

^  Matt.  vii.  12,  etc.  *  Luke  xxiv.  44. 


U  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

With  slight  exceptions  the  books  of  the  Palestinian  Canon 
have  been  universally  received  by  the  Christian  Church.^ 

Christendom  has  never  arrived  at  any  unanimous  decision 
as  to  the  canonicity  of  the  O.T.  Apocrypha.  In  the  Patristic 
period  and  throughout  the  Middle  Ages,  there  were  scholars 
who  preferred  the  Palestinian  Canon ;  but  popular  usage  and 
Church  authority  adopted  the  wider  Canon  of  the  Septuagint.^ 

At  the  Reformation  the  Protestant  Churches  practically 
limited  their  O.T.  to  the  Palestinian  Canon,  but  at  the  Council 
of  Trent,  in  1546,  the  Church  of  Rome  authoritatively 
accepted  the  Canon  of  the  Vulgate,  which  includes  the  bulk 
of  O.T.  Apocrypha.^  The  Greek  Church  arrived  at  a  similar 
decision  at  the  Synod  of  Jerusalem  in  1672.* 

^  Some  Syrian  authorities  omitted  Chronicles,  Ezra  and  Nehemiah, 
Esther  and  Job  ;  and  the  canonicity  of  Esther  was  not  fully  acknowledged 
even  in  the  fourth  century  a.d,;  Athanasius  and  Gregory  Nazianzen  lx>th 
omit  it  from  their  lists.— Buhl,  O.T.  Canon,  Eng.  tr.,  pp.  53,  58. 

'  Jerome  attempted  to  limit  the  O.T.  to  the  Palestinian  Canon,  but  the 
Council  of  Carthage,  held  in  a.d.  397,  accepted  the  Apocrypha  as  well. 

'  i.e.,  the  additions  to  Daniel  and  Esther,  Baruch,  the  Letter  of 
Jeremiah,  i  and  2  Maccabees,  Judith,  Tobit,  Ecclesiasticus,  and  Wisdom. 

*  Buhl,  p.  65.  It  seems,  however,  that  the  decision  has  not  determined 
the  practice  of  the  Greek  Church;  "the  current  of  Greek  opinion"  is 
said  to  favour  the  Hebrew  or  Protestant  Canon.  Cf,  Smith's  Bible 
Dictionary,  Canon. 


CHAPTER  n. 

EARLIER   HISTORICAL  BOOKS 
GENESIS  TO   KINGS 


r.  Alphabetical  Table  of  Terms 

15. 

E. 

and  Symbols. 

16. 

JE. 

2.  Methods  of  Composition. 

17. 

D. 

3.  Earlier  Theories. 

18. 

JED. 

4.  Current  Documentary 

19. 

H. 

Theories. 

20. 

P. 

5.  Methods  of  Analysis. 

21. 

Completion  of  Pentateuch. 

6.  Limitations  of  Analysis. 

22. 

Mosaic  Elements. 

7.  General  Table  of  Analysis. 

23- 

Genesis. 

8.  Sketch  of  Argument. 

24. 

Exodus. 

9.  Argument  from   Historical 

25- 

Leviticus. 

Situation. 

26. 

Numbers. 

10.  Argument  from  Theology. 

27. 

Deuteronomy. 

II.  Argument  from  Literary 

28. 

Joshua. 

Parallels. 

29. 

Judges. 

12.  Linguistic  Argument. 

30. 

Ruth.i 

13.  Argument  from  Mutual  Rela- 

31- 

Samuel. 

tions  of  Documents, 

32. 

Kings. 

14.  J. 

33. 

Teaching  of  Historical  Books. 

I.  Alphabetical  Table  of  Terms  and  Symbols. — 

Aj  Dillmann's  symbol  for  P. 
"i  »  »        a    E. 

Boo^  of  the  Covenant^  Exodus  xx-xxiii.,  §§5,  15. 
Book  of  the  Four   Covenants^  Wellhausen's  title  for  the 

Priestly  Code. 
C,  Dillmann's  symbol  for  J. 

^  Ruth  is  included  in  this  chapter  in  order  to  follow  the  arrangement  of 
the  English  Bible  ;  it  is  doubtful  whether  it  can  be  called  "earlier." 

15 


i6  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Z>,  either  the  Kernel  of  Deuteronomy,  or  the  Deuteronomic 
material  generally,  or  in  any  particular  book,  §§  17,  27. 

Z>i,  the  Kernel  of  Deuteronomy. 

Z>2,  Z>^,  Deuteronomic  material  later  than  D^. 

Z>a.,  Kittel's  symbol  for  a  History  of  David,  identified  by 
Budde  with  J. 

Deuteronomy^  Kernel  of^  see  Kernel  of  Deuteronomy. 

Deuteronomic^  applied  to  material  in  the  Kernel  of  Deu- 
teronomy, or  more  widely  to  material  in  the  style  of 
Deuteronomy,  for  which  "  Deuteronomistic "  is  some- 
times used. 

Deuteronomic  Epitome^  the  abstract  of  an  earlier  source 
made  by  the  Deuteronomic  author  of  Kings,  §32. 

Deuteronomisty  Author  of  Deuteronomy,  or  of  D^,  etc. 

Deuteronofnistic^  see  Deuteronomic. 

Z>/'.  =  D2orR'^. 

Ey  the  Elohist  Prophetic  Document,  or  its  author,  §  15. 

^^,  earliest  stratum  of  E. 

E\  E^,  later  strata  of  E. 

Ely  symbol  used  in  this  work  for  the  narratives  concerning 
Elijah  and  Elisha,  §  32. 

Elohist,  used  by  earlier  critics  for  the  author  of  all  the 
Elohistic  material  in  the  Hexateuch,  />.,  P  +  E;  by 
later  critics  for  E,  §§  3,  15. 

Elohist,  First  or  Earlier,  title  given  to  P  by  critics  who 
supposed  it  to  be  the  earliest  document  of  Hexateuch. 

Elohistf  Later  or  Second,  title  given  to  E  by  critics  mentioned 
above. 

Elohistic  Prophetic  Document,  E,  §  15. 

Grundschrift,  name  given  to  the  Elohistic  material,  P  +  E, 
of  the  Pentateuch,  as  the  framework  of  the  whole,  §  3. 

H,  Law  of  Holiness,  P^,  §  19. 

Hexateuch,  Hex.,  Pentateuch  +  Joshua. 

Holiness,  Law  of,  see  Law  of  Holiness. 

J,  the  Jehovistic  Prophetic  Document,  or  its  author,  §  14. 

y^,  earliest  stratum  of  J. 

PP,  later  strata  of  J. 


METHODS  OF  COMPOSITION  17 

JE^  the  document  obtained  by  combining  J  and  E,  §  16. 
JED^  the  document  obtained  by  combining  JE  and  D, 

§18. 
y>,  Kittel's  symbol  for  a  History  of  David  mainly  identified 

by  Budde  with  J. 
Jehovistic  Prophetic  Document^  J,  §  14. 
Kernel  of  Deuterofwmy^  the  contents  of  the  first  edition  of 

Deuteronomy,  D\  §  17. 
Law  of  Holiness^  Leviticus  xvii.-xxvi.,  H  or  P^,  §  19. 
P^  either  the  Priestly  Code,  or  any  material  by  priestly 

writers,  §  20. 
/*\  the  Law  of  Holiness,  H,  §  19. 
/'^j  the  Priestly  Code  proper. 
p%^  />»,  p\  later  additions  to  the  Priestly  Code. 
Priestly  Code,  V\  §  20. 
Prophetic  Docufnents,  J  and  E. 
C  Wellhausen's  symbol  for  P^. 
P,  editor,  or  matter  added  by  an  editor. 
P'^i  editor  who  added  D  to  JE,  or  matter  composed  by 

him,  §  17. 
P"^^,  editor  who  combined  J  and  E,  or  matter  added  by 

him,  §  16. 
P^,  editor  who  combined  JED  and  P,  or  later  priestly 

editors  who  supplemented  the  Pentateuch  and  other 

historical  books,  §  21. 
Si  Kittel's  symbol  for  a  history  of  Saul,  mainly  identified 

by  Budde  with  J,  §  31. 
^^S",  Kittel's  symbol  for  a  history  of  Saul,  mainly  identified 

by  Budde  with  £2,  §  32. 

2.  Methods  of  Composition. — A  history  of  ancient  times 
is  the  last  stage  of  a  process  by  which  it  is  connected  with 
the  events  it  describes.  The  intervening  links  are,  amongst 
other  things,  the  effects  of  these  events,  monuments  and 
inscriptions,  and  earlier  histories.  In  a  first-class  history 
we  have  the  result  of  careful  study  of  these  authorities; 
the  author  combines  information  from  various  sources,  and 
c 


i8  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

reconstructs  the  nature,  sequence,  and  relation  of  events; 
he  also  adds  notes  which  give  references  to  and  extracts 
from  his  authorities.  The  text  is  the  homogeneous  work 
of  a  single  mind,  and  rests  primarily  on  the  authority  of 
the  author ;  its  accuracy  depends  partly  on  that  of  his  sources, 
partly  on  his  industry,  honesty,  intelligence,  and  imagination. 
The  notes  enable  the  reader  to  test  the  judgment  of  the 
modern  historian  by  the  statements  of  the  ancient  authorities. 
In  our  O.T.  books  this  advanced  form  of  history  has  not  yet 
been  reached.  They  stop  short  at  a  much  earlier  stage,  and 
are  roughly  equivalent  to  the  notes  of  such  a  work  without 
the  text.  There  were  early  sources,  the  documents  in  which 
tradition  was  first  written  down,  or  the  contemporary  account 
of  events.  Later  writers  utilised  these  in  primitive  fashion. 
In  the  ancient  East  custom  and  tradition  were  supreme ;  when 
once  a  story  had  taken  shape,  its  general  form  and,  in  a 
measure,  even  its  words  were  sacred.^  Yet,  from  time  to 
time,  Israelite  scholars  were  inspired  to  attempt  a  fuller  and 
more  spiritual  treatment  of  the  annals  of  the  chosen  people. 
A  modern  author  tries  to  be  original  in  method  and  language 
— in  the  text  of  his  works,  but  not  in  his  notes;  there  he 
is  most  anxious  to  reproduce  his  authorities  as  accurately 
as  possible.  The  ancient  historian  reproduced  and  supple- 
mented; he  did  not  write  a  new  work  of  his  own.  He 
used  an  ancient  book  as  a  groundwork,  into  which  he 
inserted  his  new  material ;  he  retained  time-honoured  phrases, 
and  interwove  sentences  and  paragraphs  from  his  sources 
with  each  other,  and  with  connecting  matter  and  other 
additions  of  his  own,  into  a  most  remarkable  hterary  mosaic. 
In  the  course  of  this  process  he  expressed  his  conception 
of  the  course  of  events,  and  his  judgment  on  history;  he 
omitted  objectionable  passages,  or  accommodated  them  to 
the  better  taste  and  higher  spiritual  feehng  of  later  times; 
he    explained,    illustrated,    expanded,    or    moralised.      Like 

*  In  the  same  way  children  resent  any  departure  from  the  familiar  form 
of  a  favourite  story,  and  many  people  have  a  predilection  for  narratives 
**in  the  words  of  Scripture  itself" — preferably  the  A.V. 


EARLIER   THEORIES  19 

modern  historians,  he  exercised  his  judgment  and  imagina- 
tion as  to  what,  in  the  nature  of  things,  must  have  happened, 
and  supplemented  or  even  corrected  the  earHer  narrative 
accordingly.  Nevertheless,  he  retained  as  many  and  as 
extensive  verbatim  extracts  as  possible;  he  was  not  writing 
a  new  book  of  his  own,  but  preparing  a  new  edition  of 
the  old  history.  Thus  a  comparison  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels 
shows  that  Matthew  and  Luke  largely  consist  of  matter 
extracted  verbatim  from  older  sources,  and  in  Tatian's 
Diatessaron  a  continuous  narrative  is  constructed  by  piecing 
together  extracts  from  the  four  Gospels.  Similarly,  Chronicles 
is  an  intricate  combination  of  sections  from  the  earlier 
historical  books  with  the  author's  additions.  Several  verses 
in  Judges  i.  occur  in  different  parts  of  Joshua.  But  this 
method  of  using  verbatim  extracts  from  earlier  works  is 
not  confined  to  cases  where  the  same  passage  is  still  found 
in  two  O.T.  books.  A  careful  examination  of  the  books 
we  are  now  dealing  with  shows  that  they  are  made  up  of 
extracts  from  earlier  works,  which  are  only  preserved  so 
far  as  they  are  contained  in  our  present  books.  By  using 
this  method  the  authors,  or  rather  editors,  have  done  us 
much  better  service  than  if  they  had  rewritten  the  history 
in  modern  fashion.  For  the  statements  in  these  books,  we 
have  not  merely  the  authority  of  late  editors,  but  of  one  or 
more  earlier  sources. 

3.  Earlier  Theories. — We  have  only  space  to  state  briefly 
the  chief  types  of  these  theories,  and  here  and  there  to  give 
some  slight  indication  of  the  grounds  on  which  they  have  been 
advocated  or  rejected. 

(a)  Authorship  by  Moses,  Joshua,  Samuel,  and  the  Prophets. — 
This  view,  though  supported  by  many  other  arguments,  practi- 
cally rests  on  the  supposed  consensus  of  opinion  of  the 
Rabbis  and  the  early  Church.  It  contains  an  important 
element  of  truth.  The  Pentateuch  is  Mosaic,  inasmuch  as 
it  rests  on  the  authority  of  Moses,  and  has  its  roots  in  his 
work  and  teaching.     Its  laws  were  promulgated  by  the  Jewish 


20  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

leaders,  and  accepted  by  the  people,  because  they  were  rightly 
believed  to  be  in  accordance  with  the  revelation  made  to 
him.  It  is  not  improbable  that  the  prophets  had  a  share 
in  composing,  editing,  and  preserving  the  sacred  records. 
But  there  is  no  appreciable  evidence  that  Moses,  Joshua,  or 
Samuel  actually  wrote  the  Pentateuch  or  the  Books  of  Joshua, 
Judges,  or  Samuel,  or  that  the  prophets  composed  the  Book 
of  Kings.i  The  contents  of  the  Pentateuch  naturally  suggested 
the  use  of  the  phrases,  "  Law  ^  of  Moses,"  or  "  Book  of  the 
Law  of  Moses,"  as  titles  of  the  Pentateuch.  When  once 
these  titles  were  established,  they  were  sure  to  be  interpreted 
as  implying  that  the  Pentateuch,  as  a  literary  composition, 
was  the  personal  work  of  Moses.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
editors  who  gave  the  Pentateuch  and  the  Books  of  Joshua 
and  Samuel  their  present  form,  included  in  these  works  the 
accounts  of  the  deaths  of  Moses,  Joshua,  and  Samuel 
respectively.  This  fact  shows  that  it  was  neither  intended 
nor  expected  that  they  would  be  regarded  as  literary  com- 
positions by  these  three  great  leaders.  A  careful  examination 
of  the  historical  books  shows  that  they  contain  material  from 
sources  belonging  to  different  ages,  and  that  much  of  their 
contents  must  be  later  than  the  times  of  the  leaders  whose 
names  they  bear.  Hence  the  claims  of  Samuel  and  Joshua 
to  authorship  even  of  parts  of  books  are  not  strongly  urged; 
and  almost  all  critics  admit  that  the  Pentateuch  contains  an 
appreciable  amount  of  editorial  additions  made  long  after 
the  Mosaic  Age.  A  very  large  portion  of  the  Pentateuch, 
forming  the  basis  of  the  work,  is  still  ascribed  to  Moses  by 
some  scholars ;  but  the  tendency  of  criticism  is  to  minimise 
the  Mosaic  elements. 

(b)  The  Older  Docume7itary  Theory. — The  modern  criticism 
of  the  historical  books  starts  with  the  pubhcation  in  1753,  by 

1  Cf.  Ch.  i.  §  2,  External  Evidence. 

2  Tdrahy  of  which  word  ' '  law  "  is  an  unsatisfactory  equivalent.  Torah 
was  originally  used  of  any  instruction  on  religious  matters,  whether  given 
by  priest  or  prophet.  In  its  earlier  uses  it  is  more  akin  to  "  revelation  " 
than  to  "  law." 


EARLIER  THEORIES  21 

Astruc,  a  French  physician,  of  his  Conjectures  sur  les  memoires 
originaux  dont  il  paroit  que  Moyse  s'est  servi  pour  composer 
le  livre  de  la  Genese.  Noticing  that  the  divine  name  Elohm 
was  used  throughout  some  sections  of  Genesis,  and  the 
divine  name  Jehovah  throughout  others,  he  analysed  the  book 
into  two  main  sources,  the  Elohistic  and  the  Jehovistic^  and 
ten  minor  sources,  consisting  chiefly  of  fragments.  Moses, 
according  to  Astruc,  arranged  this  material  in  four  columns, 
the  contents  of  which  were  afterwards  rewritten  as  a  con- 
secutive work.i 

(c)  The  Fragmentary  Theory? — The  attack  on  the  unity 
of  the  Pentateuch  was  not  long  confined  to  Genesis.  The 
analysis  into  sources  was  carried  to  extremes,  and  it  was 
maintained  that  the  whole  Pentateuch  was  a  compilation 
from  a  large  number  of  more  or  less  independent  fragments. 
The  numerous  resemblances  between  the  Pentateuch  and 
Joshua  were  observed,  and  the  two  books  were  ascribed  to 
the  same  author.^  This  analysis  excluded  the  possibility 
of  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  as  a  whole. 

(d)  The  Supplement  Theory,^ — The  permanent  elements  of 
the  Fragmentary  Theory  were  the  assertion  of  the  composite 
character  of  the  whole  Pentateuch,  of  its  close  connection 
with  the  Book  of  Joshua,  and  the  consequent  denial  of  its 
Mosaic  authorship.  But  criticism  soon  returned  to  the  lines 
indicated  by  Astruc.  Though  a  section  might  not  connect 
with  what  went  before  and  after,  it  was  seen  to  connect 
with  a  series  of  similar  sections  throughout  the  Pentateuch 
and  Joshua.  Deuteronomy  was  soon  seen  to  be  substantially 
independent.  The  rest  proved  to  be  compiled  from  older 
documents,  often  interwoven,  especially  in  the  narrative 
sections,  in  a  very  intricate  fashion.  For  this  compilation 
Astruc's  analysis  into  a  main  Elohistic  document  and  a 
main  Jehovistic  document  was  accepted,  and  extended  to 

*  HoLziNGER,  p.  41. 

2  Geddes,  1792;  Vater,  1802-1805. 

^  Geddes,  ap.  Addis,  Documents,  etc.,  I.  xxiv. 

*  Stahelin,  1830;  Ewald,  1831;  TucH,  1838. 


22  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

the  whole  Hexateuch,^  outside  of  Deuteronomy.^  The 
Elohistic  document  was  clearly  the  framework  of  the  whole 
book,  into  which  the  other  material  had  been  fitted.  Hence 
it  was  naturally  supposed  that  this  framework  was  the  older 
book,  and  that  the  Jehovistic  material  had  been  added  by 
a  later  editor  to  supplement  the  original  text.  Because  of 
the  use  of  the  Elohistic  material  as  a  framework,  it  has 
often  been  called  the  "  Grundschrift "  or  "  Fundamental 
Document."     Ewald  called  it  "the  Book  of  Origins." 

4.  Current  Documentary  Theories. 

(a)  Completion  of  the  Analysis.  —  Further  examination 
showed  that  the  Elohistic  material  had  been  taken  from 
two  separate  documents,  the  Priestly  Code  ^  and  the  Elohistic 
Prophetic  Narrative;*  and  that,  although  the  Priestly  Code 
had  been  used  as  the  framework  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  other 
material  had  not  been  composed  to  supplement  it,  but  had 
been  taken  from  independent  documents.  Further  analysis 
has  been  occupied  with  the  detailed  division  of  the  books 
between  the  several  documents,  and  in  showing  that  the 
main  documents  are  themselves  composite,  especially  that 
the  Priestly  Code  may  be  divided  into  the  older  Law  of 
HoHness^  and  the  more  recent  Priestly  Code  proper  6;  and 
that  the  documents  of  the  Hexateuch  extend  into  Judges, 
Samuel,  and  Kings. 

As  the  result  of  this  long  investigation  there  is  substantial 
agreement  on  the  following  points  : — 

The  Pentateuch  is  compiled  from  four  main  documents : 
the    two    Prophetic    Documents,    the    Jehovistic    (J),   using 

^  i.e.t  Pentateuch  +  Joshua. 

'  There  are  small  sections  of  the  composite  work  in  our  book  of  Deut. 
See  on  Deut. 

3  P,  called  at  one  time  the  First  Elohist  by  those  who  regarded  it  as  the 
older  of  the  two. 

*  E,  similarly  sometimes  called  the  Second  Elohist.  The  analysis  of 
the  Elohistic  material  into  these  two  documents  was  made  by  Hupfeld, 
1853,  but  had  been  suggested  by  Ilgen,  Addis,  I.  xxviii. 

6  II  or  Pi.  «  V\ 


CURRENT  DOCUMENTARY  THEORIES    23 

Jehovah  in  Gen.,  the  Elohistic  (E),  using  Elohim  in 
Gen. ;  the  Priestly  Code  (P),  using  Elohim  in  Gen. ;  the 
bulk  of  Deuteronomy  (D). 

Tne  Priestly  Code  includes  an  earlier  work,  the  Law  of 
Holiness  (H),  Lev.  xvii.-xxvi.  There  are  post-exilic  elements 
in  the  Hexateuch. 

Josiah's  law-book  was  an  early  edition  of  Deuteronomy, 
and  was  composed  not  very  long  before  its  publication  in  621. 

The  Prophetic  Documents,  J  and  E,  are  older  than 
Deuteronomy. 

The  detailed  analysis,  as  far  as  the  division  into  P,  D  and 
the  combined  JE  are  concerned. 

The  following  points,  however,  are  still  matters  of  con- 
troversy : — 

The  relative  age  of  D  and  P ;  whether  the  Priestly  Code, 
as  a  whole,  apart  from  editorial  additions,  is  post-exilic 
and  later  than  Deuteronomy,  or  pre-exilic  and  earlier  than 
Deuteronomy. 

The  relative  age,  mutual  relationship,  dates,  and  place  of 
composition  of  the  Prophetic  Documents,  J  and  E. 

The  detailed  analysis  of  passages  containing  material 
from  J  and  E  into  the  portions  belonging  to  J  and  E 
respectively. 

The  presence  of  the  same  documents  in  the  Hexateuch 
and  in  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings. 

The  process  by  which  J,  E,  and  D  were  combined. 

The  analysis  of  the  four  main  documents  into  earlier 
sources  and  later  additions. 

The  time  and  mode  of  separation  of  Joshua  or  its  contents 
from  the  rest  of  the  Hexateuch. 

(b)  The  Theory  of  the  Pre-exilic  origin  of  the  Priestly 
Code. — Of  the  above  points  of  difference,  that  concerning 
the  age  of  the  Priestly  Code  divides  the  critics  who  accept 
the  analysis  of  the  Hexateuch  into  two  schools.  A  minority, 
including  very  distinguished  scholars,^  maintain  that  the  Law 

*   DiLLMANN,  KiTTEL,  BaUDISSIN,  etc. 


24  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

of  Holiness  may  include  elements  as  old  as  Moses,  and  the 
bulk  of  the  Priestly  Code  was  composed  before  Deuteronomy.^ 
But  it  is  admitted  that  the  Law  of  Holiness,  though  contain- 
ing material  older  than  the  rest  of  the  Priestly  Code,  was 
itself  compiled  during  the  Exile,^  and  that  the  Code  contains 
post-exilic  material.  But  those  who  regard  P  as  post-exilic 
would  admit  that  it  is  largely  based  on  pre-exilic  customs 
and  ritual,  perhaps  partly  preserved  in  writing.  Hence  the 
difference  between  the  two  schools  is  not  so  striking  as  it 
seems  at  first  sight.  According  to  the  one,  P  is  pre-exilic 
with  post-exilic  additions;  according  to  the  other,  P  is  post- 
exilic,  using  pre-exilic  sources.  Both  views  would  be  included 
in  the  formula — P  is  a  combination  of  pre-exiHc  and  post-exilic 
material. 

(c)  The  Theory  of  the  Post-exilic  origin  of  tJie  Priestly 
Code.^ — Arranging  the  four  main  documents  in  the  order 
J,  E,  D,  P.* 

As  this  is  the  theory  followed  throughout  the  present  work, 
it  is  explained  here  in  a  tabular  form,  and  a  sketch  of  the 
arguments  in  its  favour,  and  some  further  details  are  given 
in  later  sections.  According  to  this  theory,  the  Hexateuch 
is  the  final  result  of  a  long  development,  during  which  its 
material  passed  through  the  following  stages : — ^ 

(i.)  The  events  of  early  Israelite  history,  the  w^ork  and 
words  of  Moses,  primitive  Israelite  customs,  traditions,  and 
documents. 

(ii.)  The  compilation,  c.  800-650,  of  the  two  Prophetic 
Documents,  J  and  E,  which  include,  inter  alia,  the  earliest 
extant  edition  of  the  Law  (the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  Exodus 
xx.-xxiii.),  and  some  early  poems. 

1  According  to  Dillmann  and  Noldeke,  c.  800. 

2  Dillmann,  Num.,  etc.,  645  flf. 

3  Graf,  Wellhausen,  Kuenen,  Stade,  etc.  ;  Driver,  etc.  This 
is  often  called  the  Grafian  Theory,  and  is  held  by  the  majority  of  recent 
scholars. 

^  The  priority  of  J  to  E  is  not  an  essential  feature  of  this  theory. 
^  For  the  sake  of  clearness,  the  analysis  of  J,  E  and  the  later  additions 
to  D  and  F  are  not  represented  in  this  table  ',  cf,  ^\  14-20. 


METHODS  OF  ANALYSIS  25 

(iii.)  The  combination  of  J  and  E  into  a  single  work  JE, 
c.  650-600. 

(J  +  E)  RJ«  =  JE.i 

(iv.)  The  Kernel  of  Deuteronomy,  D,  published  in  621, 
compiled  somewhat  earlier.     Second  Edition  of  the  Law. 

(v.)  Combination  of  JE  and  D  into  a  single  work  before 
the  end  of  the  Exile. 

(JE  +  D)Rd  =  JED. 

(vi.)  Compilation  of  the  Law  of  Holiness,  H  or  P',  Lev. 
xvii.-xxvi.,  etc.,  between  621  and  the  end  of  the  Exile.  Third 
Edition  of  the  Law. 

(vii.)  Compilation  of  the  Priestly  Code,  P,  and  the  in- 
corporation with  it  of  the  Law  of  Holiness,  after  the  Exile ; 
published  by  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  in  444.  Fourth  Edition 
of  the  Law. 

(viii.)  Combination  of  JED  and  P,  and  exclusion  of 
Joshua  or  its  contents,^  thus  forming  our  Pentateuch, 
Fifth  and  Final  Edition  of  the  Law,  and  Book  of  Joshua, 
shortly  after  444. 

(JED  +  P)  RP  =  Pentateuch  +  Joshua. 

5.  Methods  of  Analysis. — We  have  seen  that  the  use  of 
the  divine  name  Jehovah  in  some  sections  of  Genesis,  and 
Elohim  in  others,  afforded  a  clue  to  the  composite  character 
of  the  Pentateuch.  This  feature,  however,  is  only  one  of 
many.  There  is  a  multitude  of  abrupt  transitions,  repetitions, 
contradictions,  differences  of  style,  theological  standpoint,  and 
historical  situation,  which  are  inexplicable  on  the  theory  that 
the  Pentateuch  is  a  single  consecutive  work;  but  which  are 
perfectly  intelligible  when  we  recognise  that  it  is  compiled 
from  independent  documents.  It  will  be  convenient  to  describe 
the  analysis  under  three  headings  : — 

(a)  Tlie  Legal  Codes. — Most  of  the  legislation  is  contained 

^  «'.*.,  the  composite  work  JE  includes  matter  from  J  and  E  combined 
by  a  Redactor  RJ*,  who  added  necessary  connecting  matter,  and  otherwise 
modified  his  sources.  The  other  equations  are  to  be  interpreted  in  the 
same  way.  »  Cf.  \\  2i,  28. 


26  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

in  three  separate  codes :  The  Book  of  the  Covenant^  Exodus 
XX.  24-xxiii.  19;  The  Kernel  of  Deuteronomy^  Deuteronomy 
v.-xxvi.  j  The  Laws  of  the  Priestly  Code^  the  bulk  of 
Exodus  xxv.-xl.,i  Leviticus,  Numbers  i.-x.,  etc.  Here 
large  blocks  of  material  have  been  inserted  whole.  The 
differences  between  these  codes  show  that  they  must  have 
been  composed  at  different  times  and  under  very  different 
circumstances.  Already,  therefore,  it  is  clear  that  at  least 
three  documents  were  used  in  the  compilation  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch. 

(b)  Complete  Sections, — Apart  from  these  codes,  the  com- 
posite character  of  the  work  is  shown  by  the  marked 
differences  between  consecutive  sections.  Take,  for  in- 
stance, the  two  accounts  of  the  Creation,  Genesis  i.  i-ii.  4a 
and  ii.  4b-25.  They  differ  in  style:  the  former  is  a  carefully 
ordered,  almost  scientific  statement,  arranged  in  formal 
schedules  of  the  same  type,  with  recurring  formulse;  the 
latter  is  a  graphic  popular  narrative;  each  has  its  own 
vocabulary  and  idioms.  They  differ  in  theological  stand- 
point :  the  former  takes  great  trouble  to  avoid  every 
appearance  of  anthropomorphism,  the  latter  is  frankly 
anthropomorphic;  the  interests  of  the  former  are  cosmic, 
it  is  concerned  with  earth  and  heaven  and  all  life,  the 
latter  thinks  only  of  an  inland  province — nothing  is  said 
of  fishes;  the  moral  of  the  former  is  the  observance  of 
the  Sabbath  sanctioned  by  the  divine  example,  that  of  the 
latter,  the  sanctity  of  marriage  as  sanctioned  by  primitive 
usage.  Moreover,  the  two  accounts  contradict  each  other. 
In  the  former  the  animals  are  first  created,  and  then 
Elohim,  by  a  single  utterance,  creates  mankind  in  two 
sexes;  in  the  latter  a  man  is  first  formed,  then  the  animals, 
then  a  woman. 

In  Exodus,  Numbers,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings 

there  are  consecutive  sections  which  present  similar  contrasts. 

It   is   extremely   difficult   to   suppose    that   a    single  author, 

writing  a  single  consecutive  work,  wrote  first  in  one  style 

^  The  main  exception  is  Exodus  xxxi.  i8b-xxxiv.  28. 


METHODS   OF  ANALYSIS  27 

and  then  in  another.     Here  again  we  trace  compilation  from 
independent  documents. 

A  comparison  of  such  sections,  in  style,  theological  stand- 
point, and  historical  situation,  with  each  other  and  with  the 
three  codes  shows  that  they  fall  into  three  series,  one  of 
which  connects  with  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  another  with 
Deuteronomy,  and  a  third  with  the  Laws  of  the  Priestly  Code. 
Moreover,  the  sections  connecting  with  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant  can  again  be  divided  into  two  series.  Thus  our 
analysis  has  discovered  the  four  main  documents :  two  con- 
necting with  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  these  are  J  and  E ; 
the  Kernel  of  Deuteronomy,  and  connected  passages,  D ;  and 
the  Priestly  Code,  P. 

(c)  Single  Sections  compiled  from  two  or  more  Documents, — 
Further,  however,  what  seems,  at  first  sight,  a  single  con- 
secutive narrative  of  one  event  proves  to  be  a  combination 
of  two  or  more  independent  accounts  of  that  event.  Here 
again  the  composite  character  of  such  sections  is  shown 
by  differences  of  style,  etc.,  by  abrupt  transitions,  and  by 
repetitions  and  contradictions.  The  following  is  the  analysis 
of  the  account  of  the  Flood.  The  sections  in  ordinary  type 
are  from  P ;  those  in  italics  from  J ;  those  in  small  capitals 
were  added  by  the  editor,  who  combined  the  two : — 

"And  the  Lord  said  unto  Noah^  Come  thou  and  all  thy  ^ 
house  into  the  ark ;  for  thee  have  I  seen  righteous  before  me 
in  this  generation.  Of  every  clean  beast  thou  shalt  take  to 
thee  by  sevens^  the  male  and  his  female :  and  of  beasts  that 
are  not  clean  by  two^  the  male  and  his  fe?nale.  Of  fowls  also 
of  the  air  by  sevens,  the  male  and  tJie  female ;  to  keep  seed 
alive  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth.  For  yet  seven  days,  and 
I  will  cause  it  to  rain  upon  the  earth  forty  days  and  forty 
nights;  and  every  living  substance  that  I  have  made  will  I 
destroy  from  off  the  face  of  the  earth.  And  Noah  did  according 
unto  all  that  the  Lord  comt?ianded  him. 

"And  Noah  was  six  hundred  years  old  when  the  flood  of 
waters  was  upon  the  earth. 

"And  Noah  went  in,  and  his  sons,  and  his  wife,  and  his 


28  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

son^  wives  with  hinty  into  the  ark,  because  of  the  waters  of  tJie 
flood.  Of  clean  beasts,  and  of  beasts  that  are  not  clean,  and 
of  fowls,  and  of  everything  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth,  there 
went  in  two  and  two  unto  Noah  into  the  ark,  the  male 

AND    THE    FEMALE,    AS    GOD    HAD    COMMANDED    NOAH.      And 

it  cafne  to  pass  after  seven  days,  that  the  waters  of  the  flood 
were  upon  the  earth. 

"  In  the  six  hundredth  year  of  Noah's  life,  in  the  second 
month,  the  seventeenth  day  of  the  month,  the  same  day  were 
all  the  fountains  of  the  great  deep  broken  up,  and  the  windows 
of  heaven  were  opened. 

"  And  the  rain  was  upon  the  earth  forty  days  and  forty 
nights. 

"  In  the  selfsame  day  entered  Noah,  and  Shem,  and  Ham, 
and  Japheth,  the  sons  of  Noah,  and  Noah's  wife,  and  the 
three  wives  of  his  sons  with  them,  into  the  ark;  they,  and 
'every  beast  after  his  kind,  and  all  the  cattle  after  their  kind, 
and  every  creeping  thing  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth  after 
his  kind,  and  every  fowl  after  his  kind,  every  bird  of  every 
sort.  And  they  went  in  unto  Noah  into  the  ark,  two  and  two 
of  all  flesh,  wherein  is  the  breath  of  life.  And  they  that 
went  in,  went  in  male  and  female  of  all  flesh,  as  God  had 
commanded  him  : 

"  And  the  Lord  shut  him  in.  And  the  flood  was  forty 
DAYS  UPON  the  EARTH  ;  and  the  ivaters  increased,  and  bare  up 
the  ark,  and  it  was  lifted  up  above  the  earth. 

"  And  the  waters  prevailed,  and  were  increased  greatly  upon 
the  earth  ;  and  the  ark  went  upon  the  face  of  the  waters.  And 
the  waters  prevailed  exceedingly  upon  the  earth ;  and  all  the 
high  hills,  that  were  under  the  whole  heaven,  were  covered. 
Fifteen  cubits  upward  did  the  waters  prevail;  and  the  moun- 
tains were  covered.  And  all  flesh  died  that  moved  upon  the 
earth,  both  of  fowl,  and  of  cattle,  and  of  beast,  and  of  every 
creeping  thing  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth,  and  every  man  : 

"  All  in  whose  nostrils  was  the  breath  of  life,  of  all  that  was 
in  tlie  dry  land,  died.  And  every  living  substance  was  destroyed 
which  was  upon  the  face  of  the  ground,  both  man,  and  cattle^ 


METHODS  OF  ANALYSIS  29 

and  the  creeping  things^  and  the  fowl  of  the  heaven  ;  and  they 
were  destroyed  from  the  earth:  and  Noah  only  remained  alive^ 
and  they  that  were  with  him  in  the  ark. 

"And  the  waters  prevailed  upon  the  earth  an  hundred  and 
fifty  days.  And  God  remembered  Noah,  and  every  living 
thing,  and  all  the  cattle  that  was  with  him  in  the  ark :  and 
God  made  a  wind  to  pass  over  the  earth,  and  the  waters 
asswaged  j  the  fountains  also  of  the  deep  and  the  windows  of 
heaven  were  stopped. 

'■^And  the  rain  from  heaven  was  restrained ;  and  the  waters 
returned  from  off  the  earth  continually  : 

"And  after  the  end  of  the  hundred  and  fifty  days  the  waters 
were  abated.  And  the  ark  rested  in  the  seventh  month,  on 
the  seventeenth  day  of  the  month,  upon  the  mountains  of 
Ararat.  And  the  waters  decreased  continually  until  the  tenth 
month :  in  the  tenth  month,  on  the  first  day  of  the  month, 
were  the  tops  of  the  mountains  seen. 

"And  it  came  to  pass  at  the  end  of  forty  days,  that  Noah 
opened  the  window  of  the  ark  which  he  had  made:  and  he 
sent  forth  a  raven,  which  went  forth  to  and  fro,  until  the 
waters  were  dried  up  from  off  the  earth.  Also  lie  sent  forth 
a  dove  from  him,  to  see  if  the  waters  were  abated  from  off 
the  face  of  the  ground;  but  the  dove  found  no  rest  for  the 
sole  of  her  foot,  a7id  she  returned  u?ito  him  into  the  ark, 
for  the  waters  were  on  the  face  of  the  whole  earth :  then  he 
put  forth  his  hand  and  took  her,  aftd  pulled  her  in  unto  him 
into  the  ark.  Afid  he  stayed  yet  other  seven  days ;  and  again 
he  sent  forth  the  dove  out  of  the  ark;  and  the  dove  came  in 
to  him  in  the  evening ;  and,  lo,  in  her  mouth  was  an  olive 
leaf  pluckt  off:  so  Noah  knew  that  the  waters  were  abated 
from  off  the  earth.  And  he  stayed  yet  other  seven  days ;  and 
se7it  forth  the  dove ;  ivhich  returned  not  again  unto  him  any  more, 

"  And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  six  hundredth  and  first  year,  in 
the  first  month,  the  first  of  the  month,  the  waters  were  dried 
up  from  off  the  earth : 

"And  Noah  removed  the  covering  of  the  ark^  and  looked,  and, 
behold,  the  face  of  the  ground  was  dry. 


30  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

"And  in  the  second  month,  on  the  seven  and  twentieth  day 
of  the  month,  was  the  earth  dried."  (Genesis  vii.  i-viii.  14.) 

The  composite  character  of  this  narrative  is  seen  :  (i.)  from 
repetitions ;  as  to  the  entering  in  to  the  ark,  the  rising  of  the 
flood,  the  perishing  of  all  living  creatures,  and  the  drying 
of  the  earth ;  (ii.)  from  contradictions ;  in  P  we  have  periods 
of  150  days,  in  J  of  40  and  of  7;  in  P  there  are  pairs  of 
all  the  kinds  of  animals,  in  J  sevens  of  the  clean,  pairs 
of  the  unclean.  Moreover,  the  P  passages  present  the 
characteristics  of  P,  and  thus  connect  with  the  rest  of  that 
document.  They  fit  into  its  scheme  of  exact  chronology; 
they  give  a  quasi-scientific  account  on  a  cosmic  scale,  the 
great  deep  is  broken  up  below,  and  heaven  opened  above; 
there  is  no  anthropomorphism;  we  have  the  divine  name 
Elohim,  and  P's  favourite  formulae,  "  after  his  kind,"  "  beast, 
cattle,  creeping  thing,  fowl,  bird,"  etc.  On  the  other  hand, 
in  J  we  have  graphic  popular  narrative,  e.g.^  the  picturesque 
episode  of  the  dove ;  anthropomorphism,  the  Lord,  i.e.  Jehovah^ 
shuts  up  the  ark;  the  divine  name  Jehovah,  etc.  In  several 
instances  the  P  paragraphs  interrupt  the  connection  between 
the  J  paragraphs,  and  vice  versa.  The  phrases  in  small 
capitals  are  assigned  to  the  editor,  because  they  do  not 
seem  to  belong  to  their  immediate  context,  and  yet  find 
no  place  in  the  other  document. 

Similar  composite  narratives  and  groups  of  laws  occur  in 
other  books. 

Thus,  apart  from  the  question  of  date  and  authorship, 
analysis  is  able  to  divide  the  Hexateuch  into  the  four  main 
documents,  J,  E,  D,  P;  the  exact  division,  however,  of  J 
and  E  being  often  difficult  and  uncertain.  A  similar  analysis 
can  be  made  of  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings.^ 

6.  Limitations  of  Analysis. — The  reader  will  have  gathered 
that  the  task  of  analysing  the  historical  books  into  the  earlier 
documents  from  which  they  were  compiled  is  a  difficult  one — 
by  no  means  so  impossible  as  it  seems   at  first  sight,  but 

^  See  ^§  29-32. 


LIMITATIONS   OF  ANALYSIS  31 

still  sufficiently  serious  to  tax  the  resources  of  criticism  to 
the  utmost.  Moreover,  though  most  useful  and  interesting 
results  are  obtained,  the  task  can  be  only  imperfectly  fulfilled, 
and  the  analyses  given  here  and  elsewhere  are  not  put  forward 
as  being  accurate  and  complete  in  every  detail.  The  main 
documents  have  certain  characteristics,  and  portions  contain- 
ing these,  and  all  that  obviously  belongs  to  such  portions,  may 
be  confidently  assigned  to  given  sources.  But  there  is  a 
certain  amount  of  neutral  material  which  might  have  been 
written  in  any  period ;  it  is  natural  to  assign  such  to  the  same 
source  as  its  context,  and  yet  it  may  have  been  borrowed 
from  an  earlier  document,  or  added  by  a  later  editor.  To 
take  a  practical  illustration :  when  a  section  is  assigned  ^ 
to  R°  or  D,  all  that  is  meant  is  that  the  Deuteronomic 
characteristics  are  found  in  the  passage  and  not  those  of 
the  other  sources.  Hence  it  is  mainly  Deuteronomic,  but 
may  include  phrases  or  sentences  borrowed  from  earlier 
sources;  or,  again,  information  or  laws  obtained  by  the 
Deuteronomist  from  earlier  sources,  but  expressed  in  his 
own  language.  On  the  other  hand,  a  passage  may  be 
assigned  to  JE,  without  any  intention  of  excluding  the 
possibility  that  some  neutral  matter  not  essential  to  the 
original  context  may  contain  additions  by  later  editors.  In 
some  cases  a  later  writer,  either  unconsciously  or  as  a 
matter  of  literary  taste,^  imitated  the  style  of  an  earlier 
document.^  It  is  often  difficult  to  distinguish  such  imita- 
tions from  the  original,  especially  when  they  are  largely  made 
up  of  quotations  from  the  document  imitated. 

In  the  analyses  given  in  the  following  sections,  space  and 
clearness   have   necessitated   the  omission   of  many   details. 

^  This  kind  of  uncertainty  is  specially  common  as  to  parts  of  sections 
which  are  substantially  Deuteronomic,  because  they  make  large  use  of 
earlier  material ;  the  work  of  the  Priestly  writers  is  more  easily  and 
certainly  distinguished. 

^  As  modern  scholars  write  Ciceronian  Latin.  The  Hebrew  editors,  etc. 
no  more  intended  or  expected  their  compositions  to  be  taken  for  the  work 
of  the  Jehovist  or  the  Deuteronomist,  than  the  author  of  a  Latin  essay 
to-day  expects  his  essay  to  be  ascribed  to  Cicero. 

^  e.^.,  the  Deuteronomic  passages  in  Chronicles. 


32 


BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 


The  origin  of  the  longer  sections  has  been  given;  the 
presence  in  such  sections  of  phrases  and  verses  from  other 
sources  has  been  indicated,  where  they  contained  anything 
important,  either  critically,  historically,  or  in  its  bearing  on 
the  immediate  context,  otherwise  such  minutiae  of  analysis 
have  been  ignored.  Phrases,  etc.  have  usually  been  assigned 
to  the  same  source  as  their  context,  when  it  is  not  clear  that 
they  belong  to  other  sources,  attention  being  called  to  any 
uncertainty  where  important  questions  are  involved.  In  this 
way  it  is  hoped  that  the  reader  will  be  able  to  obtain  an 
accurate  conception  of  the  analysis  as  a  whole,  without  being 
bewildered  by  a  multiplicity  of  detail. 

7.  Sketch  of  Analysis. — The  following  table  is  intended 
to  serve  as  a  rough  diagram  of  the  contents  and  distribution 
of  the  main  sources  of  the  Hexateuch.  For  the  sake  of 
simplicity,  where  the  bulk  of  a  chapter  belongs  to  one 
source  and  a  few  verses  to  another,  the  chapter  is  reckoned 
to  the  main  source.  For  the  more  detailed  and  exact 
analysis  see  "Contents"  in  §§ 23-32.  Genesis  xiv.  and  Deuter- 
onomy xxxii.,  xxxiii.  are  omitted,  as  not  belonging  to  the 
main  sources.  The  division  of  J,  E,  D,  and  P  into  various 
strata  is  ignored.  Sporadic  editorial  additions,  />.,  those 
which  do  not  amount  to  a  continuous  revision,  are  also 
ignored  : — 


PandJ 
Combined 

Genesis  1-13,  15-19. 

P  and  J  E 
Combined 

Genesis  20-50. 

Exodus  1-24. 

Numbers  11-16,  20,  21,  32. 

Joshua  22. 

Judges  20,  21. 

P 

Exodus  25-31,  35-40. 

Leviticus. 

Numbers  i-io,  17-19,  25-31,  33-36. 

SKETCH   OF  THE  ARGUMENT 


33 


P  and  JED 

Combined 

Deuteronomy  34. 
Joshua  13-21. 

JED 

Joshua  i-ii. 
(Judges  2-8,  10-15.)! 

JE 

Exodus  32-34- 
Numbers  22-24. 
(Judges  9,  16-19.)! 
(i.  and  ii.  Samuel.)  ^  ^ 
(i.  Kings  1,2.)! 

J 

Judges  I. 

E 

Joshua  24.3 

(i.  Kings  20,  22.)! 

(ii.  Kings3?,  7,  9^  10')^ 

D 

Deuteronomy  1-31. 
Joshua  12  and  23. 

Deuteronomic 
Compilation 

from 
Older  Sources 
cf.  JE  and  E 

i.  and  ii.  Kings. 

8.  Sketch  of  the  Argument  for  the  post-exilic  date  of  P 
and  the  order  J  and  E,  D,  P.  In  the  previous  section  we 
described  the  kind  of  evidence  by  which  the  composite 
character  of  the  Hexateuch  is  established;  we  have  now 
to  show  how  the  dates  of  the  documents  are  determined. 
The  arguments,  alike  for  the  analysis  and  for  the  theory  of 
the  dates  and  order  of  the  documents,  are  cumulative.     They 

!  The  identification  of  the  sources  of  Judges  2-21  and  Samuel,  and 
Kings  with  J  and  E  is  doubtful. 

^  Except  poems  and  some  other  additions. 
»  Edited  by  R^- 


34  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

do  not  form  a  chain,  which  is  worthless  if  one  link  is  broken ; 
they  are  rather  like  an  array  of  pillars  supporting  a  roof — 
the  roof  will  stand,  even  though  some  of  the  pillars  are 
weak  or  rotten.  These  arguments  fall  into  five  groups, 
which  partially  overlap:  (i.)  Historical  Situation;  (ii.) 
Theological  Standpoint ;  (iii.)  Relation  to  other  O.T. 
Literature;  (iv.)  Vocabulary  and  Style;  (v.)  Mutual  Rela- 
tion of  the  Documents.  These  will  be  dealt  with  more 
fully  in  separate  sections,  but  it  may  be  useful  to  take  a 
general  view  of  them  here. 

(i.)  Historical  Situation. — J  and  E  imply  the  historical 
situation  of  the  Early  Monarchy;  D  that  of  the  Later 
Monarchy,  connecting  especially  with  the  reforms  of  Josiah ; 
P  that  of  the  exilic  or  post-exilic  period,  connecting  especially 
with  the  reforms  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

(ii.)  The  Theological  Standpoint  of  each  agrees  with  what 
we  know  of  the  theology  of  the  period  of  its  historical 
situation. 

(iii.)  Relation  to  other  O.T.  Literature. — J  and  E  have 
points  of  contact  with  the  literature  before  c.  650;  D  with 
the  hterature  between  c.  651  and  the  close  of  the  Exile;  P 
with  the  literature  during  and  after  the  Exile.  D  is  unknown 
before  the  Later  Monarchy ;  P  before  the  Exile. 

(iv.)  Style  and  Vocabulary. — The  style  and  vocabulary  of 
each  is  that  of  the  period  to  which  it  is  assigned  by  its 
historical  situation. 

(v.)  Mutual  Relation  of  the  Documents. — J  and  E  together, 
D,  P  represent  three  ascending  stages  of  development;  and 
P  implies  the  prior  existence  of  D,  and  D  that  of  J  and  E. 

9.  Argument  from  the  Historical  Situation. — The  laws  in 
the  Book  of  the  Covenant  (JE)  are  addressed  to  a  people 
cultivating  the  land,  and  living  in  houses ;  ^  hence  this  code 
was  compiled  after  the  settlement  of  the  Israelites  in  Canaan. 
It  contemplates  a  more  setded  state  of  society  than  that 

^  Exodus  xxi.  6,  xxii.  5. 


fi  S  A  ,^  y- 

or  THE 

THE   HISTORICAL  SITUATION  35 

described  in  Judges,  and  therefore  belongs  to  the  Monarchy. 
It  also  recognises  a  multiplicity  of  sanctuaries,  and  lays  no 
stress  either  on  ritual  or  on  any  official  priesthood.  Thus  we 
read  in  Exodus  xx.  24-26  : 

"An  altar  of  earth  thou  shalt  make  unto  me  ...  in  every 
place  where  I  record  my  name  I  will  come  unto  thee  and 
I  will  bless  thee." 

The  places  referred  to  where  Jehovah  recorded  His  name 
are  the  holy  places,  Bethel,  Beersheba,  Gilgal,  etc.,  con- 
secrated by  the  appearances  of  Jehovah  to  the  patriarchs, 
which  are  known  in  history  as  the  "  high  places."  ^  In 
these  matters  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  reflects  the  practice 
of  the  time  of  the  Judges  and  the  Early  Monarchy,  when 
sacrifices  were  performed  not  only  by  priests,  but  by  patri- 
archs,2  heads  of  families,^  judges,'*  and  kings  ;^  not  merely 
at  the  Tabernacle  or  the  Temple,  but  at  many  places,^ 
especially,  as  Kings  tells  us  repeatedly,  at  the  high  places.'' 
The  leaders  and  teachers  of  this  period  and  the  early  writers, 
seem  quite  unconscious  that  they  are  transgressing  any  law; 
the  adverse  comments  on  their  behaviour  come  from  later 
writers.  Thus,  in  these  and  other  ways,  the  historical  situation 
implied  by  the  Prophetic  Documents  is  that  of  the  Early 
Monarchy. 

Two  chief  points  in  the  laws  of  Deuteronomy  are:  (a) 
the  limitation  of  sacrifice  to  a  single  sanctuary,  which  is 
therefore  the  only  legitimate  temple  of  Jehovah,  and  (d)  the 
limitation  of  the  priesthood  to  the  Levites.  As  we  have 
just  seen,  there  are  no  traces  of  such  limitations  under  the 
earlier  kings.      But   Amos,   Hosea,  and   Micah   attack  the 

1  Bethel,  Gen.  xxviii.  19,  Hos.  x.  15  ;  Beersheba,  Gen.  xxi.  33,  Amos 
V.  5  ;  Gilgal,  Joshua  iv.  20,  v.  138".,  Amos  iv.  4. 
'^  Jacob,  Gen.  xxxiii.  20, 
'  Manoah,  Judges  xiii.  19 ;  Jesse,  i  Sam.  xx.  29. 

*  Gideon,  Judges  vl  24. 

*  Saul,  I  Sam.  xiv.  35 ;  Solomon,  X  Kings  iii.  4. 

*  Ophrah,  Judges  vi.  24;  Ebenezer  and  Ramah,  I  Sam.  vii.  9,  17; 
Gilgal,  I  Sam.  xi.  15 ;  Gibeon,  I  Kings  iii.  4,  etc. 

'  I  Kings  XV.  14,  etc. 


$6  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

high  places  and  their  priests  on  account  of  immorality 
and  superstition.^  Hezekiah  made  an  attempt  to  suppress 
the  high  places.  2  Isaiah's  teaching  as  to  the  inviolabiUty 
of  Zion  and  the  deliverance  from  Sennacherib  enhanced  the 
prestige  of  the  Temple.  Josiah's  suppression  of  the  high 
places  was  suggested  by  a  law-book  found  in  the  Temple. 
This  book  was  read  by  Shaphan  to  himself,  and  to  the  king, 
and  read  through  publicly  by  the  king  to  the  people.  Clearly 
the  book  was  much  shorter  than  our  Pentateuch;  but  may 
very  well  have  been  an  early  edition  of  Deuteronomy.  For 
the  main  object  of  Josiah's  reforms,  the  establishment  of  the 
Temple  as  the  only  legitimate  sanctuary  of  Jehovah,  is  one  of 
the  chief  themes  of  Deuteronomy,  and  most  of  the  details  of 
his  reformation  are  based  upon  laws  in  Deuteronomy.^ 

The  northern  kingdom  had  disappeared,  and  any  point 
of  Josiah's  dominions  lay  within  easy  reach  of  Jerusalem, 
so  that  it  seemed  that  a  single  sanctuary  might  suffice  for 
the  wants  of  the  whole  community.  Thus  the  historical 
situation  implied  in  Deuteronomy  is  that  of  the  times  of 
Josiah,  the  close  of  the  Jewish  Monarchy. 

One  distinctive  feature  of  the  Priestly  Code  is  the  limitation 
of  the  priesthood  to  the  house  of  Aaron,  the  establishment 
of  a  dynasty  of  supreme  pontiffs  or  high  priests,  and  the 
assignment  to  the  non-Aaronite  Levites  of  the  menial  duties 
of  the  Temple  service.  There  is  no  trace  of  this  distinction 
between  priests  and  Levites  in  Deuteronomy,  or  in  the 
account  given  by  Kings  of  Josiah's  reforms,  or  in  the 
prophecies  of  Jeremiah,*  or  in  any  earlier  documents. 
But  Ezekiel  confines  the  priesthood  to  the  priests  of  the 
Temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  degrades  the  priests  of  the  high 
places,  />.,  the  rest  of  the  Levites,  to  the  position  of  menial 

^  Hos.  X.  8  ;  Amos  iv.  4  f. ;  Mic.  i.  $  f. 

^  2  Kings  xviii.  4. 

8  Cf.  in  2  Kings  xxiii.  4-7  with  Deut.  xii.  1-16  ;  8,  9  with  Deut.  xviii. 
6-8  (the  discrepancy  is  quite  intelligible  on  practical  grounds,  and  the 
author  of  Kings  seems  conscious  of  it) ;  24  with  Deut.  xviii.  11. 

*  Jeremiah  speaks  of  "the  priests,  the  Levites"  (xxxiii.  18),  and  other 
places. 


THE  THEOLOGICAL  STANDPOINT      37 

attendants.  1  Although,  according  to  this  arrangement,  the 
priests  were  only  a  single  clan  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  it  is 
stated  that  over  four  thousand  priests  returned  after  the 
Exile,  but  only  seventy-four  Levites.^  Later  on  Ezra  had 
great  difificulty  in  inducing  any  Levites  to  accompany  him 
to  Jerusalem.^  Naturally  the  subordinate  position  assigned 
to  them  by  Ezekiel  had  slight  attractions.  In  this  and  in 
other  matters,  and  especially  in  the  account  of  the  work 
of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  we  see  that  the  historical  situation 
implied  by  the  Priestly  Code  is  subsequent  to  the  time  of 
Ezekiel,  and  is  that  of  the  period  after  the  Exile,  and  that 
this  code  is  to  be  identified  with  the  Law  which  Ezra  brought 
to  Jerusalem.^  In  every  way  the  laws  of  the  Priestly  Code 
point  to  a  time  when  the  Temple,  its  services  and  priesthood, 
were  the  chief  national  institutions,  and  the  main  concern  of 
the  Jews.     This  was  the  case  after  the  Exile,  but  not  before. 

10.  Argument  from  Theological  Standpoint. — There  are 
special  difficulties  in  the  application  of  this  argument;  the 
hne  of  development  of  Israelite  theology  is  not  fully  deter- 
mined, and  chronological  landmarks  are  more  difficult  to 
find  in  the  case  of  doctrines  than  in  the  more  concrete 
matters  of  temple  and  priesthood.  Yet  some  points  are 
clear,  and  make  for  the  theory  now  being  explained.  The 
frank  anthropomorphisms  of  J,  and  in  a  less  degree  of  E, 
would  naturally  indicate  an  early  stage  in  the  religion  of  Israel ; 
and  the  stress  laid  in  these  documents  upon  the  dramatic 
interest  of  the  narratives  points  to  their  proximity  to  the  primi- 
tive tradition.  Thus  and  otherwise  the  theology  of  J  and  E 
is  consistent  with  a  date  in  the  Early  Monarchy,  or  even  earlier. 

1  Ezek.  xliv.  10-16.  ^  Ezra  ii.  36-40.  '  Ezra  viii. 

*  e.g.^  after  the  Exile  there  were  no  Jewish  kings  till  the  Maccabees, 
and  the  head  of  the  community  was  the  High  Priest ;  so  in  the  Priestly 
Code  the  greatest  possible  emphasis  is  laid  on  the  supreme  position  of  the 
High  Priest,  while  the  king  is  ignored.  In  Neh.  viii.  18,  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles  is  kept  for  eight  days,  in  accordance  with  Lev.  xxiii.  39 
(P),  as  against  the  seven  days  of  Deut.  xvi.  13-15.  In  Neh.  x.  37  f., 
the  people  pay  tithes  to  the  Levites,  and  the  Levites  to  the  priests  in 
accordance  with  Num.  xviii.  20-26.  The  Deuteronomic  arrangements  for 
tithes  are  quite  different. 


38  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

As  Deuteronomy  provides  for  a  single  sanctuary  and  a 
single  priestly  tribe,  so  it  also  asserts  expressly  and  em- 
phatically the  unity  of  the  Godhead  :  "  Hear,  O  Israel,  thy 
God,  Jehovah,  is  one  God."  ^  This  express  statement  is  the 
natural  sequel  to  the  attack  of  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and 
Micah  upon  the  popular  worship  of  Jehovah  as  one  among 
many  gods,  and  prepares  the  way  for  the  detailed  exposition  of 
monotheism  in  Isaiah  xl.-lv. 

Similarly  there  are  many  features  in  the  Priestly  Code 
which  are  best  explained  by  assigning  it  to  the  post-exilic 
stage  of  Israelite  religion,  e.g.^  the  scrupulous  avoidance  of 
all  anthropomorphism,  the  numerous  traces  of  systematic 
thought  and  method  in  the  priestly  versions  of  the  narratives, 
the  stress  on  the  *'  holiness "  of  Israel,  and  the  practical 
application  of  the  principle  to  an  elaborate  system  of  minute 
external  observances. ^ 

II.  Argument  from  Literary  Parallels. — Points  of  contact 
with  J  and  E  are  found  in  the  prophets  of  the  eighth  century.^ 
Hosea  refers  to  Jacob's  wrestling  with  the  angel;*  Amos 
and  Isaiah  to  the  overthrow  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah;^ 
Micah  to  "the  land  of  Nimrod,"  and  to  the  history  of  Balaam 
and  Balak.6 

On  the  other  hand,  documents  before  c.  680-630^  afford 
no  evidence  that  their  authors  were  acquainted  with  Deuter- 
onomy, or  P. 

*  Deut.  vi.  4. 

2  Early  ritual  is  often  elaborate,  and  so  far  the  priestly  ritual  might  be 
early,  and  doubtless  is  partly  based  on  primitive  custom.  But  we  know 
that  enthusiasm  for  ritual  was  rife  and  increasing  after  the  Exile,  and  the 
spiritual  and  scientific  treatment  of  the  subject  points  to  the  later  date. 

'  Of  course,  points  of  contact  between  two  documents  are  evidence 
of  the  date  of  the  one  document  only  when  the  date  of  the  other  is 
known.  So  that  for  this  purpose  we  can  only  use  passages  whose  dates  are 
fairly  certain. 

*  Gen.  xxxii.  22-32 ;  Hos.  xii.  2-6. 

^  Gen.  xix.;  Isaiah  i.  9 ;  Amos  iv.  il. 

*  Mic.  V.  6,  vi.  1-8;  Gen.  x.  8,  9 ;  Num.  xxii.-xxiv. 

'  Approximate  limits  to  the  date  of  Deuteronomy  as  composed  shortly 
before  621. 


LITERARY   PARALLELS  39 

This  statement  would  be  challenged  by  some,  space  does  not  allow  us 
to  deal  with  it  in  detail ;  but  as  the  treatment  of  the  argument  from 
literary  parallels  is  very  difficult,  and  needs  much  discrimination,  it  may 
be  as  well  to  say  a  few  words  on  the  subject,  in  order  to  show  what  is  the 
point  at  issue.  Parallels  between  the  Pentateuch  and  early  literature  are 
often  cited  as  arguments  against  this  theory,  although  they  are  quite  irrele- 
vant for  some  such  reasons  as  the  following : — 

(i.)  Only  references  in  early  literature  to  characteristic  features  of 
Deuteronomy  and  P  could  be  used  as  arguments  against  the  current 
(Grafian)  theory;  for  that  theory  holds  that  J  and  E  were  early,  at  any  rate 
in  their  original  form,  and  that  D  and  P  also  use  earlier  material,  and  that 
many  of  the  customs  and  rites  dealt  with  were  much  more  ancient  than 
these  documents.  Hence  it  is  quite  consistent  with  the  Grafian  theory 
that  early  literature  should  refer  to  J  and  E  and  to  some  matters  found 
in  D  and  P,  and  that  sacrifices,  feasts,  etc.  dealt  with  in  D  and  P  should 
have  existed  long  before  the  dates  assigned  to  these  documents. 

(ii.)  Many  alleged  parallels  are  entirely  irrelevant,  and  are  only  such  as 
must  naturally  exist  between  works  in  the  same  language,  by  authors  of 
the  same  race,  acquainted  with  the  history  and  literature,  customs  and 
traditions  which  were  earlier  than  both  of  them.  Thus  we  should  not 
maintain  that  the  parallels  between  J  and  E,  and  Amos,  Hosea,  and 
Micah  are  necessarily  proofs  that  the  prophets  were  acquainted  with 
those  documents. 

(iii.)  In  considering  two  similar  passages,  A  and  B,  there  are  at  least 
three  possible  explanations  of  their  resemblance.  A  may  be  dependent 
on  B,  or  B  on  A,  or  both  A  and  B  may  be  dependent  on  something 
prior  to  both  of  them.  A  critic  with  a  theory— and  everybody  starts 
with  a  prepossession  in  favour  of  some  theory — is  tempted  to  take  for 
granted  that  the  relation  of  the  parallel  passages  is  in  accordance  with 
his  theory.  If  he  holds  that  B  is  older  than  A,  it  seems  to  him  that 
A  is  so  obviously  dependent  on  B,  that  this  dependence  proves  the 
early  date  of  B.  But,  as  a  rule,  it  is  very  difficult  to  determine  which 
of  two  similar  passages  is  dependent  on  the  other.  Often  the  question 
can  only  be  settled  by  our  knowledge  that  one  passage  is  taken  from 
an  earlier  work  than  the  other  ;  and  where  we  do  not  possess  such 
knowledge  the  priority  is  quite  uncertain,  and  a  comparison  of  the 
passages  yields  little  or  no  evidence  as  to  the  date  of  the  documents 
in  which  they  occur. 

(iv. )  When  a  body  of  literature  is  known  to  belong  to  a  certain  period, 
and  a  document  has  numerous  parallels  to  this  literature,  it  probably  belongs 
to  the  same  period.  It  may  be  an  earlier  work  used  by  the  authors  of 
the  literature  in  question,  or  a  later  work  which  has  used  this  literature ; 
but  it  is  easier  to  verify  or  eliminate  these  possibilities  than  to  decide 
between  the  alternatives  in  the  previous  paragraph. 

(v. )  Where  a  work  is  known  to  be  composite,  a  literary  parallel  to  one 
section  affords  no  direct  evidence  of  the  date  of  other  sections.^ 

^  These  considerations  have  to  be  borne  in  mind  in  studying  the  various 
attempts  to  show  that  the  complete  Pentateuch  was  known  to  almost  all 
O.T.  writers.  For  instance,  it  is  for  these  reasons  that  Lex  Mosaica^ 
though  a  very  useful  and  interesting  study  of  the  literary  relations  of  the 
Pentateuch,  affords  no  real  evidence  against  the  Grafian  theory. 


40  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

But  Deuteronomy  is  very  closely  connected  by  numerous 
points  of  contact  with  the  literature  of  the  close  of  the 
Jewish  monarchy  and  the  beginning  of  the  Exile.  The 
parallels  with  Jeremiah  are  so  striking  that  the  prophet 
has  sometimes  been  credited  with  the  authorship  of 
Deuteronomy.  Investigation  does  not  confirm  this  im- 
pression, but  the  resemblance  shows  that  Deuteronomy 
and  the  prophecies  belong  to  the  same  period,  e.g,^  the 
term,  "  the  Priests,  the  Levites "  —  unknown  to  earlier 
literature — is  characteristic  of  both  and  of  Ezekiel.  Again 
the  Book  of  Kings  assumed  its  present  form  during  this 
period.  In  the  editorial  notes  the  editor  writes  from  the 
Deuteronomic  standpoint  that  the  Temple  is  the  only 
legitimate  sanctuary.  Also  Deuteronomy  exercises  a  very 
marked  influence  on  exilic  and  post-exilic  literature. 

The  Law  of  Holiness,  H  or  P*,  is  even  more  closely 
connected  with  Ezekiel  xl.-xlviii.  than  Deuteronomy  with 
Jeremiah.  Although  it  is  not  likely  that  Ezekiel  compiled 
this  code,  its  editor  probably  belonged  to  the  same  priestly 
circle,  so  that  the  code  may  be  assigned  to  about  the  beginning 
of  the  Exile. 

The  characteristics  of  the  Priestly  Code  proper,  P  or  P^ 
have  affinities  with  the  earlier,  and  influence  the  later  post- 
exilic  literature.  The  distinction  between  the  priests,  the 
sons  of  Aaron,  and  the  Levites — a  special  feature  of  P — 
first  appears  in  Ezekiel  xliv.,  where  the  prophet  ordains  that 
the  priesthood  is  to  be  confined  to  the  Jerusalem  Levites 
of  the  house  of  Zadok,  and  that  the  other  Levites,  the 
priests  of  the  high  places,  are  to  be  degraded  to  the  level 
of  menial  attendants.  In  the  Priestly  Code  the  claims  of 
the  Levites  to  rank  with  the  Jerusalem  priests,  the  fact  that 
their  position  was  a  menial  one  to  which  they  had  been 
degraded,  are  entirely  forgotten,  and  their  ministry  is  held 
to  be  a  long-estabhshed  privilege.  Evidently  a  considerable 
interval  separated  the  Priestly  Code  from  Ezekiel.^    Numbers 


THE  LINGUISTIC  ARGUMENT  41 

xvi.,  q,v,  (Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram),  was  unknown  in  its 
present  form  to  the  authors  of  Deuteronomy  xi.  6,  Psalm  cvi. 
17  (post-exilic),  who  speak  of  Dathan  and  Abiram,  without 
Korah.  Chronicles  is  acquainted  with  the  legal  institutions, 
etc.  of  all  the  documents  of  the  Hexateuch,  and  thus  affords 
conclusive  evidence  that  our  Pentateuch  and  Joshua  existed, 
substantially  in  their  present  form,  before  B.C.  300-250. 

12.  The  Linguistic  Argument. — A  careful  examination  of 
the  lists  in  Driver's  Introduction^  in  the  articles  in  Hastings' 
Bible  Dictionary^  etc.  will  show  that,  not  only  in  subject 
matter,  but  also  in  vocabulary  and  idiom,  Deuteronomy 
resembles  Jeremiah,  and  P  resembles  the  exilic  and  post- 
exilic  literature.  Thus  JE  and  D  agree  with  the  earlier 
literature  in  preferring  the  longer  form  ^dnokht  for  the  personal 
pronoun  "  I,"  while  P  agrees  with  the  later  literature  in  pre- 
ferring the  shorter  ^dnt. 

The  use  in  the  Pentateuch  (not  in  Joshua)  of  forms  which 
elsewhere  are  exclusively  masculine,  for  both  masculine  and 
feminine,  is  not  a  proof  of  antiquity,  but  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  text  of  the  Pentateuch  has  been  treated  differently 
from  that  of  the  other  books.  In  some  MSS.  the  usage  is 
found  outside  the  Pentateuch. ^ 

13.  Argument  from  the  Mutual  Relations  of  the  Docu- 
ments.— An  examination  of  the  documents  shows  that  they 
are  arranged  by  our  theory  in  the  natural  order  of  de- 
velopment, that  J  and  E  are  the  most  primitive,  H  and 
P  the  most  mature,  and  that  D  occupies  an  interme- 
diate position.  Thus  J  and  E  take  little  interest  in  ritual, 
which  occupies  much  of  the  attention  of  D  and  H, 
and  is  almost  the  sole  interest  of  P.  In  J  and  E  any 
Israelite  may  be  a  priest ;  in  D  the  priesthood  is  confined 
to  the  Levites ;  in  H,  the  Levites  are  not  named,  the 
priests  are  the  "  Sons  of  Aaron,"  and  the  high  priest  first 

*  Driver's  Leviticus^  pp.  25,  26. 


42  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

appears;^  in  P  the  exceptional  sanctity  and  authority  of 
the  priests  as  compared  with  the  Levites,  and  of  the  high 
priest  as  compared  with  the  priests,  are  further  elaborated 
and  emphasised.  Again,  as  to  the  slaughter  of  animals  for 
food  and  sacrifice,  in  J  and  E,  animals  may  be  killed,  and 
sacrifices  offered  anywhere;  in  D  they  may  be  slaughtered 
anywhere,  but  only  sacrificed  at  the  "place  which  Jehovah 
chooses,"  2  i,e.^  the  Temple.  Similarly,  as  we  pass  from 
J  and  E  to  D  and  P,  the  feasts  become  more  numerous, 
and  are  kept  for  a  longer  time,^  and  with  a  more  precise 
ritual.  So,  too,  the  provision  made  for  the  priests  and  the 
Temple  grows  as  we  pass  from  J  and  E,  to  D,  and  then  to 
P.  J  and  E  provide  for  firstfruits  and  firstlings,*  and  for 
tithes  in  connection  with  the  Temple  at  Bethel.*  Deuter- 
onomy defines  the  tithes,  a  yearly  tithe,  to  be  spent  in 
sacrificing  and  feasting  at  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  and 
a  tithe,  to  be  taken  every  third  year,  and  given  to  the  poor 
and  the  Levites.^  The  Priestly  Code  assigns  the  tithes  to 
the  Levites,  and  a  tenth  of  them  to  the  priests ;  gives  thirty- 
five  cities  to  the  Levites  and  thirteen  to  the  priests,  and  also 
gives  to  the  priests  the  firstfruits,  firstlings,  most  of  the 
sacrifices  and  offerings,  and  a  poll-tax  of  half  a  shekel.'^ 
Many  similar  illustrations  might  be  given  of  the  way  in  which 
the  documents  taken  in  the  order  J  and  E,  D,  P  present 
consecutive  stages  in  the  natural  movement  of  national  life. 
Moreover,  the  literary  relationship  between  the  documents 

^  No  doubt  each  of  the  different  priesthoods  at  Jerusalem  and  else- 
where always  had  a  chief  priest  as  a  necessary  practical  arrangement, 
but  the  recognition  of  the  high  priesthood,  as  a  special  divine  institution 
of  exceptional  sanctity,  first  appears  in  H,  unless,  indeed,  the  passages 
referring  to  a  high  priest  are  among  the  additions  made  to  H  by  P. 

'  Deut.  xii. 

^  Deut.  xvi.  13-15  first  directs  that  Tabernacles  shall  be  observed 
seven  days ;  P  adds  an  eighth  day,  Num.  xxix.  35.  P  also  introduces  the 
Feast  of  Trumpets  and  the  Day  of  Atonement,  Lev.  xxiii. 

*  Exodus  xxii.  29  f.  ^  Gen.  xxviii.  22,  E. 

«  xiv.  22-29,  xxvi.  12-15. 

'^  Exodus  XXX.  11-16;  Lev.  vii.,  xxvii.  ;  Num.  xv.,  xviii.,  xxxv.  ; 
Joshua  xxi. 


JUD^AN  PROPHETIC  DOCUMENT       43 

is  in  favour  of  this  order.^  The  numerous  parallels  between 
the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  JE,  and  D  and  P  (especially  H) 
are  best  accounted  for  by  supposing  that  D  and  P  knew 
JE.  The  shorter  and  simpler  code  in  JE  cannot  be  a 
selection  from  the  larger  and  more  elaborate  D  and  P. 
The  historical  retrospects  in  Deuteronomy  are  largely  a  cento 
of  material  from  JE.^ 

The  parallels  between  D  and  P,  however,  may  perhaps  be 
explained  by  supposing  that  both  D  and  P  used  the  same 
earlier  material.  It  is  doubtful  whether,  as  a  matter  purely 
of  Uterary  dependence,  it  can  be  shown  that  P  was  acquainted 
with  D.3 

14.     The  Judaean  Prophetic  Document,  J. 

(a)  Analysis. — J  was  compiled  from  older  documents  and 
traditions,  which  sometimes  contradicted  each  other.  From 
these  contradictions  J  is  sometimes*  analysed  into  earlier 
documents  and  additions  by  the  compiler  of  J.  Thus  J 
has  been  separated  into  an  older  work  J*,  c.  850,  and 
other  material  added  c.  650,  J^  Thus^  the  narratives  of 
the  Creation  and  the  Fall  are  given  to  J',  and  that  of  Cain 
and  Abel  to  J^ 

(b)  Place  of  Composition. — The  emphasis  on  the  sojourn- 
ings  of  Abraham  at  Hebron,  and  the  interest  in  Judah  in 
Genesis — according  to  J,  Judah  is  the  firstborn — and  similar 

1  Cf.^  however,  pp.  39  fT.  Although  the  dependence  of  the  other  sources 
on  J  and  E  seems  absolutely  certain,  and  the  relation  of  D  and  P  to 
each  other  and  to  J  and  E  seems  to  imply  the  priority  of  D,  more 
uncertainty  attaches  to  the  application  of  this  piece  of  evidence  than 
to  some  others,  especially  as  regards  the  relation  of  D  to  P. 

^  i.  6-iii.  29,  ix.  6-x.  11,  cf.  the  tables. — Driver's  Introduction ^ 
pp.  73,  80.  Chapters  i.-iv.,  if  not  part  of  Josiah's  law-book,  were  added 
soon  after. 

^  Such  acquaintance  is  shown,  however,  according  to  our  theory,  from 
other  evidence. 

*  The  different  elements  are  denoted  by  J*,  J^,  etc.  ;  the  editorial 
matter  by  J  or  RJ. 

"  e.g..  Ball's  Genesis  in  Dr.  Paul  IIaui't's  Sacred  Books  of  O.T, 
and  Polychrome  Bible. 


44  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

features  suggest  that  J  was  compiled  in  Judah.^  Some, 
however,  have  held  that  J  or  its  original  edition  was  compiled 
in  the  northern  kingdom.^ 

(c)  Date. — Priority  to  Deuteronomy  gives  us  a  date  before 
621;  the  earliest  possible  date  would  be  the  final  establish- 
ment of  the  Monarchy  under  David,  c.  1000;  but  the  dates 
assigned  to  J  usually  lie  between  900  and  650.  The  religious 
attitude  suggests  the  period  of  prophetic  activity  which  began 
with  Elijah,  and  was  later  on  represented  in  Judah  by  the 
prophets  of  the  eighth  century  rather  than  a  less  advanced 
age.  If  J  is  used  throughout  Samuel,  we  have  further  evidence 
that  the  document  is  later  than  the  events  recorded  in  that 
book,  though  it  probably  contains  much  older  material. 

J  is  dated  thus:  Addis,  I.,  Ixxxii.  850-750;  Cornill,  J«  850,  J* 
700;  Driver,  p.  118,  "early  centuries  of  the  monarchy";  Haupt, 
etc.,  T*  850,  J'  650;  Kautzsch,  850;  Konig,  p.  206,  "after 
David  ;  Kuenen,  J'  800,  J'  650;  Wellhausen,  History  of  Israel^ 
p.  13,  "in  the  course  of  the  Assyrian  period."  All  the  above  dates 
are  approximate.     Gunkel,  p.  Ixiv.,  dates  J  in  ninth  century. 

(d)  Contents. — J  forms  a  quasi-anecdotal  history  of  Israel 
and  its  ancestors  from  the  Creation  to  the  Conquest,  perhaps 
to  the  death  of  David.  It  is  found  in  Genesis,  Exodus, 
Numbers,  Deuteronomy  xxxiv.,  Joshua,  Judges,  and  perhaps 
Samuel.  The  editor  incorporated  some  laws,  e.g,^  Exodus 
xxxiv.  10-27,  and  ancient  lyrics,  e.g.^  the  blessing  of  Jacob, 
Genesis  xlix.^ 

(e)  Characteristics. — J  uses  Jehovah  in  Genesis,  prefers  the 
name  Israel  for  the  patriarch,  calls  the  sacred  mountain 
Sinai,  and  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine  Canaanites.  He 
delights  in  etymologies  of  personal  and  place  names.  J's 
narratives  are  graphic,  popular,  and  dramatic;  they  are  told 
for  the  interest  of  the  stories.  At  the  same  time,  the  religious 
sense  of  the  narrator  is  quick  to  seize  and  set  forth  moral 
and  spiritual  teaching,  yet  not  so  as  to  mar  the  picturesque 
charm   of  his  prose  poems.     The  theology  is  primitive  in 

*  DiLLMANN,  p.  626;  Driver,  "relatively  probable,"  p.  116; 
Haupt.  '  Kuenen,  p.  230.  ^  Probably. 


THE  EPHRAIMITIC  DOCUMENT        45 

its  frank  anthropomorphism  and  other  matters,  yet  somewhat 
advanced  in  its  deliberate  and  conscious  monotheism  and 
its  teaching  that  suffering  is  the  consequence  of  sin.  As 
to  worship,  J  speaks  of  the  high  places,  of  sacred  trees, 
without  any  consciousness  of  their  being  illegitimate. 

15.  The  Ephraimitic  Prophetic  Document,  E. 

(a)  Analysis. — E  also  has  been  analysed  into  various  strata, 
ES  E^  E3,  cf,  on  Date. 

(b)  Place  of  Coynposition, — E,  or,  at  any  rate,  its  original 
edition  E',  was  compiled  in  the  northern  kingdom.  It  is 
specially  interested  in  Joseph,  the  ancestor  of  Ephraim,  and 
in  the  Ephraimitic  hero,  Joshua.  Reuben,  which  belonged 
to  the  northern  kingdom,  is  the  firstborn  of  Israel.  If  there 
is  a  later  stratum  E"*,  it  prohably  originated  in  Judah. 

(c)  Relative  Age  of  J  and  E. — J  is  usually^  regarded  as 
the  older.  Its  anthropomorphism  and  its  theology  generally 
seem  the  more  primitive,  while  E's  theory  of  the  origin  and 
meaning  of  the  name  Jehovah,^  its  avoidance  of  that  name 
in  Genesis,  its  conception  of  Abraham  as  a  prophet,  and 
its  use  of  earlier  works,  such  as  the  Book  of  the  Wars  of 
Jehovah,  point  to  a  somewhat  advanced  stage  of  religious 
reflection  on  custom  and  tradition.  A  few  scholars,  however, 
regard  E  as  the  earlier.^  Some  again  hold  that  E  used  J 
or  J'.*  If  the  analysis  of  J  and  E  into  strata  is  accepted, 
the  problem  of  priority  becomes  very  complicated.  But  we 
may  say  that  primitive  elements  are  more  conspicuous  in  J, 
and  later  developments  in  E. 

(d)  Date. — As  an  Ephraimitic  work,  E,  or  at  any  rate  its 
original  edition  E',  must  have  been  compiled  some  time 
before  the  Fall  of  Samaria,  721,  />.,  not  later  than  750; 
and  if  it  is  later  than  J,  and  refers  to  Elisha,  it  cannot  be 

*  CORNILL,  J*,   KAUTZSCH,  KUENEN. 

*  Exodus  iii.  14,  15. 

*  DnxMANN,  etc.  Some  of  the  passages  cited  by  him  as  evidence  of 
the  late  date  of  J  are  referred  by  others  to  J"  or  RJ®. 

*  KuENEN,  p.  248. 


46  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

much  earlier.     Similar  considerations  to  those  which  affect 

J   have   led  most  critics   to  date   E,   or   E',   between   850 

and  750. 

E  is  dated  thus:  Addis,  I.,  Ixxxii.  850-750;  Cornill,  E»  750,  E' 
650;  Driver,  p.  118,  "early  centuries  of  the  monarchy";  Haupt,  etc., 
E'  750,  E'  650  ;  Kautzsch,  775  ;  Konig,  p.  205,  "  period  of  the  Judges  " ; 
Kuenen,  p.  248,  E^  750,  E'  650.    Gunkel,  p.  Ixiv.,  dates  E  B.C.  800-750. 

(e)  Contents. — E  is  a  history  of  Israel,  similar  to,  but  more 
systematic  than  J,  beginning  with  the  incident  of  Abraham 
and  Abimelech  in  Genesis  xx.,  and  extending  certainly  to  the 
close  of  Joshua,  and  perhaps  as  far  as  the  Elisha  narratives 
in  Kings.  It  also  incorporates  ancient  poems,  e.g.^  some 
of  the  Balaam  oracles,  and  laws,  e.g,^  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant.^ 

(f)  Characteristics.  —  E  partially  agrees  with  J  in  the 
following  points:  Its  narratives  still  show  a  popular  interest 
in  the  story  as  a  story,  but  there  are  more  formal  and  obvious 
signs  of  didactic  purpose ;  according  to  E,  also,  high  places 
and  sacred  trees  were  a  legitimate  feature  of  Israelite  religion. 
But  E  uses  Elohim  (in  Genesis),  not  Jehovah ;  Jacob  rather 
than  Israel;  Horeb,  not  Sinai;  Amorites,  not  Canaanites. 
The  sacred  pillar,  or  ma^feba,  occurs  frequently  in  his 
narrative.  Anthropomorphism,  if  not  entirely  absent,  is 
far  less  marked  than  in  J.  God  reveals  Himself  in  dreams, 
or  through  angels;  He  acts  through  them,  or  by  means, 
like  Moses'  rod,  which  do  not  attribute  to  Him  ordinary 
human  acts,  such  as  the  walking,  sewing,  shutting  of  a 
door,  etc.,  found  in  J.  In  other  ways,  too,  the  conscious 
formulating  of  religious  truth  seems  more  advanced,  e.g.^ 
the  express  condemnation  of  idolatry  is  constantly  in  the 
writer's  mind:  Jacob  buries  the  family  idols ;2  the  first 
commandment  forbids  the  making  of  idols ;  ^  Joshua  induces 
the  people  to  put  away  their  idols.*  If  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant  and  connected  sections  were  included  by  E  in 
his  work,  it  shows  a  more  direct  interest  in  social  order 
than  J. 

^  Probably,  cf.  on  Num.  xxiii.  f.;  Exodus  xx.  ff. 
'  Gen.  XXXV.  4.         '  Exodus  xx.  3.         *  xxiv.  14. 


COMBINED   PROPHETIC   DOCUMENT    47 

16.  The  Combined  Prophetic  Document,  JB. 

(a)  Analysis. — The  combination  of  J  and  E  was  a  process, 
the  work  of  a  school;  but  it  is  no  longer  possible  to  dis- 
tinguish its  stages. 

(b)  Place  of  Composition. — Judah. 

(c)  Date. — This  process  is,  of  course,  later  than  the  last 
editions  of  J  and  E,  used  in  the  compilation,  /.<?.,  probably 
after  650.  It  is  difficult  to  fix  the  later  limit,  J  and  E 
seem  to  have  been  known  separately  to  D*,  and  can  perhaps 
be  traced  later;  but  it  does  not  follow  that  JE  was  compiled 
after  D'.  At  first,  especially  amongst  the  more  conservative, 
the  older  separate  works  would  retain  their  authority,  while 
JE  was  ignored  as  a  modern  innovation.  Some  passages 
assigned  to  R^^  the  editor  who  combined  J  and  E,  are 
so  much  in  the  style  of  the  Deuteronomic  editors,  D'  or 
R°,  that  it  is  often  difficut  to  say  whether  a  passage  belongs 
to  R^"-  or  R^  Hence  it  has  been  suggested  that  R°  and 
R^^  are  identical,  />.,  that  two  stages  of  the  development, 
J  +  E  =  JE,  JE  +  D  =  JED,  may  be  replaced  by  the  single 
stage  J  +  E  +  D.  But  the  close  interweaving  of  J  and  E, 
and  the  ease  with  which  D  can  be  separated  from  them, 
negative  this  view.  The  resemblance  shows  that  J  and  E 
were  combined  during  the  period  dominated  by  the  influence 
of  Deuteronomy.  Yet,  in  spite  of  resemblances,  JE  is  com- 
paratively independent  of  D^,  and  has  by  no  means  broken 
loose  from  the  primitive  ideas  of  religion  and  history  to  the 
same  extent  as  D'.  The  combined  document  JED  was 
probably  compiled  during  the  Exile.  Hence  a  pre-exilic 
date,  650-586,  seems  suitable  for  JE. 

JE  is  dated :  Cornill,  650-621  ;  Driver,  p.  109,  about  the  eighth 
century;  Haupt,  c.  640;  Kautzsch,  c.  650;  Kuenen,  p.  249,  •'close 
of  the  seventh  or  opening  of  the  sixth  century." 

(d)  Method  of  Combination. ^W.  is  possible  that  R^^  used 
other  documents  besides  J  and  E.  Which  editor  first  in- 
cluded in  his  work  any  given  lyric,  or  other  section  not  an 
integral  part  of  the  main  sources,  is  often  very  difficult  to 
determine. 


48  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

R^  combined  his  materials  with  great  care  and  skill,  so 
that  it  is  often  quite  impossible  to  disentangle  them  with 
any  confidence.  The  way  in  which  P  and  J  are  combined 
in  the  account  of  the  Flood  also  illustrates  the  combination 
of  J  and  E,  except  that  the  latter  are  the  more  ingeniously 
and  intricately  interwoven.  R^^'s  general  principle  was  to 
make  up  his  narrative  of  sections  taken  unaltered  from  the 
sources,  but  much  has  clearly  been  omitted.  It  is  seldom 
that  a  narrative  can  be  resolved  into  two  parallel  accounts, 
each  complete  in  itself.  Where  the  sources  were  virtually 
identical,  repetition  has  been  avoided  by  omitting  material 
from  one  of  them.  Much  has  probably  been  cut  out  that 
seemed  unedifying  in  the  light  of  the  fuller  revelation  of 
the  Deuteronomic  age.  Moreover,  there  are  additions ;  in 
piecing  together  the  documents,  connecting  phrases  were 
often  necessary,  and  the  redactor  has  modified  and  inserted 
to  suit  the  ideas  and  teaching  of  his  times.  There  is  a 
certain  amount  of  material  clearly  not  Deuteronomic,  and 
more  closely  united  with  J  and  E  passages  than  the 
Deuteronomic  additions  usually  are,  and  yet  more  akin  to 
Deuteronomy  than  to  the  more  primitive  J  and  E.  Such 
additions  are  probably  R^%  though  perhaps  some  of  them 
might  be  assigned  with  equal  reason  to  the  final  editors  of 
J  and  E.  Of  course,  R^^  was  not  careful  to  see  that  editorial 
insertions  in  J  were  in  J's  style,  and  in  E  in  E's  style,  but 
sometimes  uses  J  words  and  phrases  in  his  additions  to  E 
passages,  and  vice  versd.  Hence  the  work  of  this  editor  has 
seriously  added  to  the  difliculty  of  separating  J  and  E,  and 
also  accounts  for  the  sporadic  occurrence  of  J  characteristics 
in  sections  clearly  belonging  to  E,  and  vice  versd. 

17.  Deuteronomic  Material,  D. 

(a)  Analysis. — The  contents  of  Josiah's  law-book  are 
denoted  by  D  or  D',  and  the  later  additions  to  this 
document,  and  the  insertions  in  Joshua,  Kings,  etc.  made 
by  editors  writing  in  the  style  and  spirit  of  D,  are  denoted 
by  R°,  D',  D\  etc. 


DEUTERONOMIC   MATERIAL  49 

(b)  Place  of  Composition. — The  earlier  portions  were  com- 
posed in  Judah,  the  later  in  Babylonia. 

(c)  Date. — Josiah's  law-book  was  composed  some  time 
before  its  publication  in  621,  and  some  time  after  J  and 
E,  upon  which  it  is  dependent,  and  also  after  the  prophets 
of  the  eighth  century.  The  latter  know  nothing  of  Deuter- 
onomy, while  Deuteronomy  gives  practical  effect  to  their 
attack  on  the  high  places  by  limiting  sacrifice  to  the 
Temple.  Further,  the  attempt  to  give  exclusive  rights  to 
a  single  sanctuary  is  more  probable  after  the  fall  of  the 
northern  kingdom.  The  Temple  might  serve  the  small 
area  of  the  southern  kingdom.  Thus  everything  points  to 
a  date  between  722  and  621.  The  anti-prophetic  policy 
of  Manasseh  and  the  almost  entire  absence  of  literature 
belonging  to  his  reign,  c.  698-643,  would  account  for  the 
lack  of  any  traces  of  the  existence  of  Deuteronomy  between 
700-621. 

D*  is  dated  thus:  Addis,  ii.  9,  701-621;  Cornill,  "shortly  before 
621";  Driver,  p.  87,  in  Sixth  Edition,  text  and  note,  "not  later 
than  the  reign  of  Manasseh,"  "the  century  before  621";  Kautzsch, 
c.  628;  Konig,  p.  217,  "soon  after  722";  Kuenen,  p.  220,  "Josiah's 
reign"  j  Wellhausen,  History ^  ?•  13.  "close  of  Assyrian  period." 

D',  etc.,  />.,  the  additions  made  to  D'  in  Deuteronomy, 
and  the  insertions  by  Deuteronomic  editors  in  Joshua- 
Kings  belong  substantially  to  the  period  between  621  and 
the  close  of  the  Exile.  In  the  Deuteronomic  edition  of 
the  Book  of  Kings,^  the  last  event  mentioned  is  the  release 
of  Jehoiachin  by  Evil-Merodach  in  561.  The  post-exilic 
additions  to  Joshua-Kings  mostly  bear  the  stamp  of  P, 
not  of  D.  Chronicles,  naturally,  contains  material  borrowed 
from  or  in  imitation  of  Deuteronomy. 

D«  is  dated  thus:  Cornill,  Second  Half  of  Exile;  Haupt,  560-540; 
Kautzsch,  561-538 

(d)  Contents. — D*  certainly  contained  Deuteronomy  xii.- 
xxvi.,  probably  v.-xi.   and  xxviii.,  less  probably  i.-iv.^    To 

^  i.e. ,  our  present  book. 

'  As  to  these  passages  see  §  27  on  Deuteronomy.  Later  editorial 
insertions  are  not  taken  into  account. 

£ 


50  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

D'  are  assigned  all  of  Deuteronomy  i.-xxx.  which  does 
not  belong  to  D^,  a  very  small  amount  of  material  in 
Genesis,  Exodus,  Numbers,  and  Samuel,  and  considerable 
portions  of  Joshua,  Judges,  and  Kings.^ 

(e)  Characteristics. — The  Deuteronomic  writers  compose 
codes,  exhortations  to  obedience;  they  provide  earlier 
history  with  chronological  framework  and  religious  comment ; 
only  in  Kings  do  they  themselves  write  history.  The  historical 
retrospects  in  Deuteronomy  are  mere  abstracts  from  JE, 
and  are  only  introduced  as  a  setting  for  the  laws  and  ex- 
hortations. The  Deuteronomic  narratives  in  Joshua  merely 
adapt  JE  to  the  Deuteronomic  theory  of  the  history  that 
Joshua  carefully  observed  the  Law  of  Moses,  />.,  Deuter- 
onomy, and  completely  conquered  Canaan,  and  cleared  it 
of  its  inhabitants. 

D,  like  E,  uses  the  names  Amorite  and  Horeb.  Favourite 
phrases  are  "  God  of  Israel,"  "  Thy  God,"  also  perhaps  found 
in  R^^  Its  main  theme  is  the  purification  of  worship  by  the 
suppression  of  the  high  places,  by  making  the  Temple  the 
only  sanctuary  of  Jehovah,  and  by  doing  away  with  idols, 
7naf(el?as,  and  all  the  paraphernalia  of  superstition.  But  it 
also  enacts  laws  in  favour  of  the  social  equity  and  benevo- 
lence inculcated  by  the  prophets,  and  formally  recognises 
the  prophetic  order. 

1 8.  The  Deuteronomic  History  and  Laws  of  Israel,  JED. 

(a)  Analysis. — D^  considered  in  the  previous  section, 
might  be  divided  into:  (i.)  additions  made  to  D'  before 
it  was  combined  with  JE;  (ii.)  additions  made  to  JE  and 
D  in  the  process  of  combination ;  (iii.)  additions  made  to 
the  threefold  work  JED  after  the  combination  had  been 
effected.  R*^  is  often  appropriately  used  alike  for  (ii.),  and 
for  the  Deuteronomic  editor  who  inserted   (ii.).^     R°,   like 

*  D'  is  used  here  for  all  Deuteronomic  material  later  than  D '. 
2  (i.),  (ii.),  (iii.)  can  only  be  distinguished  rarely  and  partially,  so  that 
R'^  and  D"  are  often  used  as  equivalent. 


I 


HISTORY  AND  LAWS  OF  ISRAEL      51 

R^^,  stands  for  a  school  and  a  process,  but  the  different  stages 
and  hands  are  only  very  imperfectly  determined, 

(b)  Place  of  Compositio7t^  Babylonia. 

(c)  X>rt/d.i— The  Exile. 

(d)  Scope  and  Method. — The  portion  of  JE  extending  from 
the  Creation  to  the  close  of  Numbers  was  only  slightly 
modified  by  R".  At  this  point  he  inserted  the  Deuteronomic 
Code  and  its  connected  exhortations.  Possibly  the  Book  of 
the  Covenant  originally  occupied  the  place  of  Deuteronomy, 
and  was  transferred  by  R°  to  its  present  position  in  the 
account  of  the  sojourn  at  Sinai. ^  Another  interesting 
suggestion  is  that  for  a  time  two  editions  of  Deuteronomy 
were  current,  one  consisting  of  xii.-xxvi.  with  v.-xi.  for  an 
introduction,  and  the  other  of  xii.-xxvi.  with  i.  i-iv.  40 
for  an  introduction.  If  so,  part  of  R°'s  work  was  the 
fusion  of  these  two  editions.  He  also  added  to  D'  other 
material,  either  his  own  or  borrowed.  He  dealt  very  freely 
with  Joshua,  providing  it  with  an  ample  framework  which 
gave  a  view  of  the  history  very  different  from  that  of  JE. 
But,  at  the  same  time,  he  retained  so  much  of  JE  unaltered, 
that  JE's  view  is  still  plain,  namely,  that  the  land  was 
only  partially  conquered,  and  that  the  inhabitants  were  not 
extirpated. 

It  is  not  certain  that  the  Deuteronomic  edition  of  Judges- 
Kings  ^  should  be  reckoned  as  entirely  one  with  that  of 
JED.  If  JE  extended  to  the  times  of  Elisha,  it  seems 
probable  that  it  was.  If  the  documentary  connection 
between  the  Hexateuch  and  these  later  books  is  confined 
to  the  use  of  J^  in  Judges  i.,  it  seems  more  likely  that 
the  editing  of  JED  and  that  of  the  Deuteronomic  editions 
of  Judges-Kings  were  two  independent  pieces  of  work, 
though  carried  out  by  the  same  school.  Even  in  this  latter 
case  R°  is  a  sufficiently  elastic  symbol  to  be  used  for  the 

^  Cf.  (b),  (c)  of  previous  section.      Kuenen,  pp.  270  f.,  admits  that 
R°  may  be  post-exilic,  but  regards  an  exilic  date  as  more  probable. 
»  Kuenen,  p.  258. 
*  Here  and  elsewhere,  Judges-Kings  does  not  include  Ruth, 


52  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

editor  of  Judges-Kings  and  for  his  insertions,  etc.  In 
Judges  and  Kings  he  supplies  a  framework  and  religious 
comments;   his  contributions  in  Samuel  are  much  slighter. 

R°  may  also  have  omitted  portions  of  JE  as  unedifying, 
may  possibly  have  had  access  to  the  separate  J  and  E, 
and  restored  sections  omitted  by  R^^.  Possibly,  too,  R°  is 
responsible  for  the  insertion  of  some  of  the  poems. 

19.  The  Law  of  Holiness,  H  or  P*. 

(a)  Analysis  and  Co?ifefits. — In  addition  to  Leviticus  xvii.- 
xxvi.,  portions  of  Leviticus  xi.,  etc.  have  been  assigned  to 
H.  This  document  was  a  compilation  from  older  codes, 
and  either  H  or  some  of  its  sources  seems  to  have  been 
dependent  on  the  Book  of  the  Covenant.  H,  as  we  now 
have  it,  contains  additions  made  by  the  editor  who  in- 
corporated it  in  the  Priestly  Code,  and  perhaps  by  others. 

(b)  Date  and  Place  of  Coinposition.  —  H  has  points  of 
contact  both  with  D'  and  the  Priestly  Code,  but  is  very 
closely  connected  with  Ezekiel  xl.-xlviii.  Though  not 
composed  by  that  prophet,  it  probably  emanated  from 
the  priestly  circle  to  which  he  belonged.  Like  Ezekiel 
xl.-xlviii.,  it  forms  an  intermediate  stage  between  D'  and 
the  Priestly  Code,  and  was  compiled  in  Babylonia  during 
the  Exile.  Its  sources  were  pre-exilic,  and  may  be  in  part 
older  than  D\ 

H  or  P  *  is  dated  :  Cornill,  second  half  of  the  Exile ;  Driver,  pp. 
138,  143,  shortly  before  the  Exile,  H  was  known  by  Ezekiel;  Haupt, 
Sacred  Books  of  O.T.^  570;  Holzinger,  pp.  447  f,  immediately  after 
the  Exile,  in  Babylonia ;  Kautzsch,  c.  561 ;  Kuenen,  p.  276,  towards  the 
end  of  the  Exile. 

(c)  Characteristics. — H  seeks  to  secure  that  Israel  shall 
be  "holy,"  /.^.,  that  condition  and  conduct  shall  be  worthy 
of  the  people's  unique  relation  to  Jehovah.  It  therefore 
lays  down  rules  for  ceremonial  purity  and  moral  life.  Its 
keynote  is  the  root  QDSh  underlying  the  Hebrew  words 
translated    "holy,"    "holiness,"    "sanctity."      These    words 


THE   PRIESTLY  CODE  53 

occur  with  special  frequency  in  H,  and  the  reason  for 
demanding  "holiness"  is  again  and  again  expressed  in  the 
phrases,  "  I  am  Jehovah,"  "  I  am  Jehovah,  your  God," 
etc.,  and  is  expressed  fully  in  Leviticus  xi.  45,  "I  am 
Jehovah,  who  brought  you  up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 
that  I  might  be  your  God;  ye  shall  therefore  be  holy,  for 
I  am  holy."  H  agrees  with  D'  against  P^*:  (i.)  in  making 
no  mention  of  the  inferior  order  of  the  priestly  tribe — the 
Levites;  (ii.)  in  insisting,  expressly  and  with  great  emphasis, 
on  the  limitation  of  sacrifice  to  a  single  sanctuary,  which  P' 
takes  for  granted ;  (iii.)  in  legislating  expressly  for  the  people 
settled  in  Canaan. 

Although  the  headings  connect  II  with  Moses  and  Sinai,  there  is  no 
attempt,  as  in  P^  to  write  from  the  standpoint  of  the  camp  in  the 
wilderness.  Thus  Leviticus  xxv.  29,  **If  a  man  sell  a  dwelling-house 
in  a  walled  city,"  cf.  Deuteronomy  xxii.  8,  '*  When  thou  buildest  a 
new  house,  then  thou  shalt  make  a  battlement  for  thy  roof."  Both 
passages  take  for  granted  city-life  in  Palestine.  In  parts  D*  writes 
as  if  on  the  eve  of  the  conquest,  but  takes  no  trouble  to  maintain  this 
standpoint. 

But  H  agrees  with  P',  against  D',  in  its  interest  in  manifold 
details  concerning  sacred  acts,  persons,  places,  times,  and  in- 
struments, />.,  those  specially  connected  with  the  external 
observances  of  religion. 


20.  The  Priestly  Code,  P,  incorporating  the  Law  of 
Holiness,  H. 

(a)  Analysis. — P  is  commonly  used  for  the  whole  of  the 
composite  document,  which  includes  (i.)  H  or  P';  (ii.)  the 
Priestly  Code  proper,  or  P';  (iii.)  later  additions,  P^  or  P^ 
As  P''  itself  is  partly  based  on  earlier  documents,  it  is  often 
difficult  to  say  whether  a  particular  passage  which  seems 
earlier  than  the  time  of  compilation  of  P'  belongs  to  one 
of  the  sources  of  P',  or  to  H. 

(b)  Mode  of  Composition. — It  is  commonly  held  that  P' 
was  composed  independently  of  H,  and  that  the  two  were 
subsequently  united.     Possibly,  however,   the  author  of  P' 


54  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

made  H  the  nucleus  of  his  work.^  Additions  were  further 
made  to  H  +  P''  by  later  writers,  and  also,  of  course,  by  the 
editor  who  combined  them. 

(c)  Date  and  Place  of  Composition?- — P'  was  composed  in 
Babylonia  after  the  Exile  and  before  the  mission  of  Ezra  to 
Jerusalem  in  458 ;  after  the  Exile,  because  there  are  no  traces 
of  its  special  characteristics  in  history  or  literature  before 
this  period,  and  because  it  marks  an  advance  on  Deuter- 
onomy, Ezekiel,  and  H ;  before  Ezra's  mission,  because  it 
is  part  of  the  Law  promulgated  by  him.^  H  and  P'  were 
also  combined  in  Babylonia  before  458,  as  H  seems  to  have 
formed  part  of  the  Law  promulgated  by  him  in  444,  and  it 
seems  scarcely  likely  that  he  combined  H  and  P'  between 
458  and  444.  It  is  a  natural  supposition  that  Ezra  was 
either  the  author  of  P^  or  the  editor  who  combined  H 
and  P'j  but  it  is  nothing  more.*  Later  additions  to  P  as 
a  separate  work  must  have  been  made  in  Judah  between 
444  and  400. 

According  to  Addis,  I.,  Ixxxiii.,  P»  about  the  time  of  Ezra;  Comill, 
P'  c,  500,  union  of  P'  and  P'  before  458;  Driver,  p.  129,  P»  "belongs 
approximately  to  the  period  of  the  Babylonian  captivity";  Haupt,  P' 
c.  500;  Holzingcr,  p.  442,  P'  the  very  beginning  of  the  fifth  century 
at  latest,  p.  453,  H  and  P '  united  in  Babylonia,  before  458  ;  Ezra 
had  no  hand  either  in  the  compilation  of  P',  or  in  its  union  with  H  ; 
Kautzsch,  P»  c.  500,  united  with  H,  c.  458;  Kuenen,  p.  303  f.,  P» 
500-475  ;  Gray,  Num.^  p.  xxxi.,  dates  Pe  (P»),  c.  500. 

(d)  Contents, — P  is  a  code  in  the  form  of  a  constitutional 
history  of  Israel;  a  collection  of  laws  and  precedents,  with 
the  circumstances  under  which  they  were  instituted.  It  begins 
with  the  Sabbath,  as  sanctioned  by  the  example  of  God  at  the 

^  I  have  not  noticed  this  suggestion  elsewhere,  but  it  is  so  obvious  that 
it  must  have  been  made  before,  and  set  aside  on  account  of  the  many 
difficulties  it  involves.  It  does  not  seem,  however,  out  of  the  range  of 
possibility. 

"^  For  H  see  previous  section. 

»  Cf,  §§  8-13. 

*  We  can  scarcely  suppose  with  Meyer,  Entstehung^  etc.,  that  the 
phrase,  "scribe  {jophcr)  of  the  Law,"  is  intended  to  mean  ^'author  of 
the  Law." 


THE   PRIESTLY   CODE  55 

Creation,  and  follows  the  course  of  events  to  the  division  of 
Canaan  amongst  the  tribes  by  Joshua.  It  includes  a  large 
part  of  Genesis,  the  greater  part  of  Exodus,  Numbers,  and 
Joshua  xiii.-xxii.,  all  Leviticus,  and  a  few  verses  at  the  close  of 
Deuteronomy  and  in  Joshua  i.-xi. 

In  Judges-Kings  there  are  a  small  series  of  passages  written 
under  the  influence  of  P,  while  Chronicles  might  be  described 
as  the  priestly  substitute  for  Joshua-Kings. 

(e)  Characteristics?' — There  is  a  large  number  of  words, 
phrases,  and  idioms  found  only  or  chiefly  in  P,  or  in  P  and 
Ezekiel  and  post-exilic  literature. 

P,  often  like  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  denotes  the  months  by  numbers 
instead  of  names ;  it  follows  the  post-exilic  usage  of  writing  ^dnt  almost 
always  for  "I,"  whereas  in  pre-exilic  works  'dnokhi  is  as  common  or 
commoner,  so  in  JE.  'Edd^  in  the  sense  of  assembly ,  is  almost,  if  not 
entirely,  confined  to  P  and  post-exilic  writers;  ^eduth,  testimony^  of 
the  tables  of  the  Law,  occurs  only  in  P,  etc.;  cf.  table  in  Driver, 
pp.  123  ff. 

It  is  fond  of  repeating  the  same  formulae  again  and  again 
in  the  same  or  successive  sections,  and  has  all  the  technical 
verbosity  of  legal  documents. 

Thus  in  Genesis  i.,  "Evening  and  morning  were  the  — ^^  day,"  "And 
God  saw  that  it  was  good,"  etc.  ;  in  Genesis  v.,  "And  —  lived  —  years 
and  begat — "  etc.;  in  Numbers  vii.,  "On  the  —  day — :  his  oblation  was," 
etc. ;  but  cf,  Amos  i. 

P'  gives  the  laws  with  the  circumstances  of  their  origin,  and 
with  an  account  of  the  first  instances  of  their  observance.  Thus, 
as  the  laws  for  the  high  priesthood  are  regarded  as  resting  on 
the  authority  of  Moses,  they  are  given  as  addressed  to  Aaron, 
and  we  are  told  how  they  were  carried  out  in  the  first  instance 
by  Aaron.  In  the  same  way  the  laws  for  the  Temple  and  its 
furniture  are  given  as  addressed  to  the  IsraeHtes  in  the 
wilderness  by  Moses,  and  we  are  told  how  they  were 
obeyed  in  the  construction  of  the  Tabernacle.  All  this 
represents  a  bond  fide  belief  that  the  principles  of  the  laws 
for  the  priesthood  and  the  Temple  were  Mosaic,  and  that 

1  Cf.  §  20. 


56  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

the  period  immediately  after  the  Exodus  furnished  precedents 
for  some  such  laws.  P'  considers  each  law,  etc.  as  an  entirely 
new  revelation  at  the  time  at  which  it  is  recorded.  Thus 
in  Exodus  vi.  2-12  the  Divine  Name,  Jehovah,  is  a  new 
revelation ;  consequently  it  is  never  used  in  Genesis.  Again 
sacrifices,  the  distinction  of  clean  and  unclean  animals  and 
meats,  etc.  were  new  revelations,  and  unknown  before  Moses. 
Hence  in  P  the  patriarchs  do  not  sacrifice,  although  they  do 
in  JE ;  and  P's  account  of  the  Flood  ignores  the  distinction 
made  by  J  between  clean  and  unclean  animals. 

P  follows  J  in  speaking  of  the  mount  of  the  Law  as  Sinai. 
While  P'  shares  with  H  and  Ezekiel  their  interest  in  the 
buildings,  furniture,  services,  and  priesthood  of  the  Temple, 
and  in  ceremonial  observances  generally,  it  introduces  several 
new  features,  e.g.^  the  distinction  between  priests  and  Levites,^ 
and  the  Day  of  Atonement,^  which  is  completion  of  a  system 
of  graduated  sanctity,  reaching  its  climax  in  a  single  point, 
temporal  sanctity  in  the  Day  of  Atonement,  local  sanctity 
in  the  Holy  of  Holies,  personal  sanctity  in  the  high  priest. 
P'  takes  the  greatest  pains  to  avoid  anthropomorphism. 
Further,  P'  closely  resembles  Chronicles  in  its  love  of 
system  and  statistics ;  it  provides  the  Pentateuch  with  a 
complete  and  consecutive  chronology  and  set  of  genealogies, 
and  gives  in  detail  the  specifications  of  the  Ark  and  the 
Tabernacle. 

21.  The  Completion  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  the  earlier 
Historical  Books. 

(a)  Form  of  JED  and  P  before  Combination, — If  JE  only 
extended  to  the  death  of  Joshua,  then  JED  and  the  Deuter- 
onomic  edition  of  Judges-Kings  were  separate  from  the  be- 
ginning, and  there  is  no  reason  why  a  Deuteronomic  editor 

*  A  development  from  Ezekiel  xliv.  10-16.  In  Ezekiel  the  status  of 
the  Levites  is  a  degradation^  newly  ordained  on  account  of  their  share 
in  the  corrupt  worship  of  the  high  places ;  in  P'  the  status  is  an  old- 
established  privilege. 

2  Leviticus  xvi.,  also  a  development  from  Ezekiel  xlv.  18-20,  who 
appoints  two  similar  days. 


COMPLETION  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH   S7 

should  have  separated  the  Joshua  sections  from  the  rest  of 
JED.  But  if  JE  extended  to  the  times  of  Elisha,  JED 
might  include  the  whole  Deuteronomic  history,  as  a  single 
work  from  the  Creation  to  the  fall  of  the  Monarchy.  This 
long  book  would  naturally  be  divided  into  sections,  and 
the  death  of  Moses  would  be  a  suitable  close  for  the  first 
of  these. 

Again  P  extended  to  the  death  of  Joshua,  but  since  it 
was  promulgated  as  the  Law  of  Moses,^  the  Joshua  sections 
may  have  been  separated  before  the  promulgation. 

Thus,  when  R'*^  set  to  work  to  combine  JED  and  P^ 
either  (i.)  the  Joshua  sections  had  already  been  separated 
from  either  or  both  documents;  or  (ii.)  both  documents 
still  included  the  Joshua  sections,  and  JED  may  have  also 
contained  the  Deuteronomic  edition  of  Judges-Kings. 

(b)  Method. — If  the  Joshua  sections  had  already  been 
severed  from  JED  and  P,  the  Pentateuchal  sections  could 
be  at  once  combined,  and  the  result  would  be  substantially 
our  Pentateuch.  Otherwise  R*"  himself  may  have  separated 
the  Joshua  sections  from  either  or  both  of  his  documents; 
or  he  may  have  combined  JED  and  P,  both  containing 
Joshua  sections,  thus  compiling  the  Hexateuch. 

R''  used  P  as  a  framework,  into  which  he  fitted  the  sections 
of  JED.  He  probably  omitted  parts  of  JED,  and  perhaps 
restored  2  passages  omitted  by  R'^  or  R^^  Otherwise  he 
combined  his  material  in  the  same  way  as  R^^  R°.  An 
example  of  his  method  has  already  been  given  in  §  5. 

If  R^'s  work  was  the  Hexateuch,  Joshua  was  separated 
from  the  Pentateuch  somewhat  later.  It  seems  more  likely 
that  Joshua  was  compiled  from  the  Joshua  sections  of  JED 
and  P  by  another  editor,  who  made  JED  the  framework. 

*  Assuming  that  the  description  of  the  Code  in  Ezra-Nehemiah  as  the 
Law  of  Moses  is  not — as  in  the  account  of  Josiah's  reforms  in  Chronicles 
—merely  due  to  the  chronicler. 

'  R''  =  the  editor,  who,  writing  under  the  influence  of  P,  added  P 
to  JED. 

'  J,  E,  and  JE  probably  continued  to  exist  as  separate  works  after  their 
contents  were  included  in  JE  and  JED. 


58  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

In  Judges-Kings  the  priestly  editors  had  no  complete 
parallel  priestly  history  to  combine  with  the  Deuteronomic 
history.  These  books  as  we  have  them  are  substantially 
the  work  of  the  Deuteronomic  editors;  the  priestly  editors 
added  comparatively  little,  and  that  little  consists  chiefly 
of  small  changes  and  insertions.  The  real  priestly  version 
of  the  history  is  Chronicles.  Also  some  further  additions 
were  made  to  the  Pentateuch  after  JED  and  P  were  com- 
bined. The  final  stage  was  the  division  of  the  Pentateuch 
into  five  books. 

(c)  Date  and  Place  of  Composition, — It  has  sometimes  been 
supposed  that  Ezra's  law-book  was  the  complete  Pentateuch 
which  had  been  compiled  in  Babylonia  before  458.  But  the 
reading  and  exposition  of  the  Pentateuch  would  scarcely  have 
been  accomplished  even  in  the  eight  days  devoted  to  Ezra's 
law-book,  and  it  would  have  severely  taxed  the  ingenuity 
of  the  Levites  to  explain  orally  the  many  contradictions, 
obscurities,  and  abrupt  transitions  of  the  Pentateuch.  The 
Priestly  Code,  even  including  H,  was  a  fairly  consecutive 
and  consistent  work,  which  lent  itself  to  such  treatment. 

Hence  the  combination  of  JED  and  P  was  probably  some- 
what later  than  the  promulgation  of  P  in  444.  It  is  usually 
dated  about  400.^  There  was  every  reason  for  amalgamating 
the  two  works  at  once.  Side  by  side,  as  separate  books,  they 
seemed  to  compete  for  the  title  of  Law  of  Moses ;  their  com- 
bination prevented  any  such  controversy. 

The  work  of  the  other  priestly  editors — the  severance  or 
formation  of  Joshua,  the  priestly  additions  to  Judges-Kings, 
the  further  additions  to  the  Pentateuch — lies  between  400 
and  300,  the  date  at  which  external  evidence^  shows  the 
complete  Pentateuch  to  have  been  in  existence.  Somewhere 
about  this  time  the  Pentateuch  was  divided  into  five  books. 

Even  after  this  we  know  from  the  LXX.  and  the  history 
of  the  LXX.  text  that  a  number  of  small  changes  were  made 


*   KUENEN,  p.  303  f.,  CORNILL,  KaUTZSCH. 
'  Cf.  chap.  i.  \  2, 


MOSAIC  MATERIAL  IN  PENTATEUCH    59 

in  the  Pentateuch  and  the  historical  books,  but  we  have 
now  reached  a  point  at  which  the  work  of  the  editor  can 
no  longer  be  distinguished  from  that  of  the  copyist,  and 
higher  passes  into  textual  criticism. 

The  Pentateuch,  in  its  final  form,  was  called  the  Law, 
TorcL,  and  later,  "the  five-fifths  of  the  Law."i  The  title 
"Pentateuch"  or  "  five  -  volumed "  was  given  to  it  by 
Greek  writers,  from  whom  it  passed  into  Latin  and  other 
languages. 

2  2.  Mosaic  Material  in  the  Pentateuch. — We  have  seen 
that  all  the  main  documents  rest  on  older  sources,  and  that 
those  used  by  D  and  P  are  not  confined  to  J  and  E.  It  seems 
extremely  probable,  if  not  certain,  that  these  earlier  sources 
contained  matter  which  originated  with,  or  received  the 
sanction  of  Moses.  Even  where  a  law  as  it  stands  was 
clearly  addressed  to  the  Israelites  of  the  Monarchy,  it  may  be 
an  adaptation  or  translation,  so  to  speak,  of  a  Mosaic  law  to 
suit  the  needs  of  later  times,  an  application  of  a  principle 
laid  down  originally  by  Moses.  A  Mosaic  element  in  the 
Pentateuch  is  as  probable  as  Davidic  poems  in  the  Psalter; 
but  in  both  cases  we  have  no  criteria  which  enable  us 
to  identify  this  element  with  any  definiteness  or  certainty. 
Many  Israelites,  at  certain  periods,  regarded  Moses  much  as 
Christians  regard  Christ,  as  the  supreme  authority  for  religious 
truth.  All  that  was  implied  by  or  deduced  from  the  teaching 
of  Moses  was  held  to  be  Mosaic,  just  as  we  call  all  that  is 
implied  by  or  deduced  from  the  teaching  of  Christ,  Christian. 
The  usage  is  natural  and  justifiable  in  both  cases.  Moses' 
position  in  Israelite  religion  was,  of  course,  only  similar,  and 
not  strictly  parallel  to  the  relation  of  Christ  to  Christianity; 
yet  the  Pentateuch  is  Mosaic  as  the  final  product  of  a  process 
which  owed  its  first  impulse,  its  direction  and  character  to 
Moses. 

1  Hdmishshd  Mmcshi  hai-tdrd. 


6o  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

23.  Genesis. 

(a)  Title.— li^  the  Hebrew  Bereshith,  "  In  the  beginning," 
i.e.,  the  opening  word  of  the  book  ;  in  the  LXX.  and  Vulg., 
and  from  them  in  other  versions,  Genesis  "  origin,"  because  it 
describes  the  origin  of  the  world. 

(b)  Contents  and  Archceology. — i.  i-ii.  4a,  P's  account  of 
the  Creation,  as  the  Institution  of  the  Sabbath,  ii.  4b-25,  J's 
account  of  the  Creation,  "God"  =  R^  in  "Lord  God." 

Narratives  of  the  Creation,  mostly  with  some  parallels  to  the  above,  are 
found  amongst  most  races  ;  but  naturally  the  closest  parallels  are  found 
amongst  the  Semites.  Parallel  to  P,  we  have  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian 
narrative  preserved  on  seven  (?)  tablets.  ^  The  Creation  starts  from  chaos' 
and  proceeds  by  stages,  presenting  similarities  of  language  and  ideas  with 
Genesis  i.,  but  loses  itself  in  a  contest  between  Merodach  and  Tiamat, 
and  gives  full  play  to  polytheist  mythology.  A  parallel  to  the  Sabbath 
has  been  seen  in  the  fact  that  amongst  the  Assyrians  certain  acts  were  for- 
■bidden  on  the  7th,  14th,  2ist,  28th  of  each  month. ^ 

J's  account  shows  traces  of  being  based  on  ancient  Semitic  tradition, 
but  no  close  parallel  to  it  has  yet  been  published. 

iii.,  iv.,  J,  The  Fall,  Cain  and  Abel,  Cainite  Genealogies, 
Lamech. 

The  elements  in  the  story  of  the  Fall — supernatural  serpents ;  forbidden 
food,  the  eating  of  which  brings  disaster  ;  and  sacred  trees— are  familiar 
features  of  all  folklore.  The  sacred  tree  and  the  demon  serpent  figure 
constantly,  but  for  the  most  part  separately,  on  Assyrian  monuments  and 
gems.  It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether  the  colossal  winged  Assyrian 
bulls  with  human  faces  were  called  Kirtibu ;  and,  even  if  they  were, 
whether  they  are  connected  with  the  Cherubim.  There  are  Phoenician 
sculptures  which  show  griffins  guarding  a  sacred  tree.  There  seems  no 
real  parallel  to  the  Fall,  the  resemblance  between  the  Babylonian  legend 
of  Adapa,  the  progenitor  of  mankind,  and  Genesis  iii.  being  probably 
fortuitous.  Adapa  forfeits  immortality  by  following  advice  to  avoid  eating 
certain  food. 

The  names  in  the  genealogies  are  sometimes  identified  with  those  of 
Babylonian  gods. 

v.,  P  j  except  29  =  J.  The  Sethite  genealogy,  Seth  to  Noah. 
Enoch. 

^  Records  of  the  Past,  New  Series,  i.  122  ff.  {cf.  147  ff.),  also  preserved 
by  Berosus ;  cf.  the  Non-Semitic  account  vi.  109,  which  has  points  of 
contact  with  P. 

2  Tiamat',  cf.  the  tehdm,  EV.  "deep." 

*  Davis,  Gen.,  etc.,  p.  25. 


GENESIS  6i 

The  genealogy  Kenan  to  Lamech  is  another  version  of  the  Cainite 
genealogy  Cain  to  Lamech.  The  numbers  differ  considerably  in  the 
Hebrew,  the  Sam.  Pent.,  and  the  LXX. 

vi.  1-4,  J,  The  Marriage  of  the  "  Sons  of  God,"  angels,  to  the 
daughters  of  men.  vi.  5-viii.,  P;  except  vi,  5-8;  viu  1-5, 
7-10,  12,  16^,  17,  22/;  via.  2^,  3rt,  6-12,  i3<^,  20-22=  J. 
The  Flood. 

The  Babylonian  epic  on  the  adventures  of  Gilgames  contains  an 
episode,  in  which  Xisuthros  tells  how  he  escaped  the  P'lood .  The  god  Ea 
warned  him  that  the  other  gods  were  about  to  send  a  Flood,  and  bade  him 
build  a  ship.  Xisuthros  did  so,  dimensions,  etc.,  are  given  ;  it  was  pitched, 
etc.,  and  had  storeys  and  a  window.  Xisuthros  brought  in  his  family, 
slaves,  and  cattle.  The  Flood  came,  lasted  seven  days,  and  drowned  all 
mankind  except  those  in  the  ship.  The  ship  grounded  on  a  mountain. 
Xisuthros  sent  out  in  succession  a  dove,  a  swallow,  and  a  raven.  The 
dove  and  the  swallow  came  back,  but  the  raven  waded.  When  Xisuthros 
saw  this,  he  left  the  ship  with  the  rest,  built  an  altar,  and  offered  sacrifice. 
The  gods  smell  the  sweet  savour,  and  swarm  like  flies  to  the  sacrifice. 
Those  who  sent  the  Flood  are  angry  because  some  have  escaped,  but  Ea 
pacifies  them,  and  Xisuthros  and  his  wife  are  rendered  immortal. 

This  account  has  some  features  in  common  with  P,  some  with  J.  A 
fragment  of  a  different  Babylonian  version  has  been  found  ;  and  another 
version  was  preserved  by  Berosus.  ^  Traditions  of  great  floods  are  also 
found  amongst  most  races. 

ix.  1-17,  P,  The  Rainbow. 

In  the  Babylonian  Deluge  story  allusion  is  made  to  **  the  bow  of  Ishtar," 
which  may  be  the  rainbow. 

ix.  18-27,  J>  Curse  of  Canaan. 

ix.  28-x.,  P;  except  x,  8-19,  21,  25-30  =  }.  Noah's  De- 
scendants. 

xi.  1-9,  J,  Tower  of  Babel. 

xi.  10-26,  P,  Genealogy  from  Shem  to  Terah. 

xi.  27-xii.,  J;  except  xi.  27,  31  /,  xii.  4^,  5,  xiii.  6,  ii^  =  P, 
Abram  and  Lot,  Migration  to  Canaan,  Visit  to  Egypt,  Separa- 
tion. 

xiv..  Unknown  Source,  Abram  and  Melchizedek. 

The  inscriptions  show  that  most,  if  not  all  the  names  in  verse  i  are 
those  of  actual  places  and  persons ;   that  Babylonia  and  other  powers  to 

*  ScHRADER,  Cuneiform  Inscr.,  etc.,  Eng.  Trans.,  i.  53,  Records  of  the 
Past. 


62  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

the  east  of  Syria  had  dealings  with  Palestine  in  very  early  times,  earlier 
than  any  date  which  might  be  fixed  for  Abraham ;  and  that  Elam  was 
supreme  in  Western  Asia  at  a  period  which  might  very  well  coincide  with 
that  of  Abraham.  But  the  inscriptions  do  not  mention  Abraham  or 
Melchizedek,  or  any  campaign  which  can  be  that  of  this  chapter.  The 
Tel-el-Amarna  tablets  show  that  Jerusalem  was  known  as  Uru-salim 
about  B.C.  1 300- 1 400.  In  a  letter  to  the  King  of  Egypt,  the  King  of 
Jerusalem  writes,  "  Neither  my  father  nor  my  mother  appointed  me  in  this 
place.  The  strong  arm  of  the  king  inaugurated  me  in  my  father's 
territory,"^  a  curious  coincidence  with  the  ''without  father,  without 
mother"  of  Hebrews — nothing  more.     See  Appendix  B. 

Differences  of  style,  etc. ,  show  that  this  chapter  stands  alone,  and  does 
not  belong  to  any  of  the  main  documents  of  the  Hexateuch.  It  has  no 
connection  with  any  context  either  in  P  or  J  ;  this  fact,  and  certain 
peculiarities  of  style  show  that  it  was  inserted  by  a  late  editor,  after  the 
combination  of  JED  and  P  ;  but  the  chapter  may  be  based  on  an  ancient 
narrative,  or  it  may  have  been  compiled  in  Babylon  during  or  after  the 
Exile,  on  the  basis  of  those  ancient  archives,  then  complete  and  well 
known,  whose  fragmentary  relics  alone  are  now  available.  Verses  18-20 
may  be  an  interpolation.  It  is  curious  that  the  number,  318,  of  Abram's 
slaves,  in  verse  14,  is  the  sum  of  the  numerical  values  of  the  consonants 
of  Eliezer,  xv.  2,  etc.,  the  only  male  slave  of  his  mentioned  by  name. 

XV.,  JE,  Promise  to  Abram  of  an  heir  whose  seed  shall 
inherit  Canaan. 

xvi.,  J;  except  la,  3,  15/  =  ?,  Birth  of  Ishmael. 

xvii.,  P,  Institution  of  Circumcision. 

xviii.  f,  J;  except  xtx.  29  =  P,  Promise  of  Isaac,  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah,  Lot. 

XX.  fif.,  E  j  except  xxi.  i-  5  =  P  * ;  xxi.  6^,  7,  33,  xxii. 
20-24  =  J;  x^'  18,  xxii.  14-18  =  RJ^,  Abraham,  Sarah,  and 
Abimelech,  Birth  of  Isaac,  Sending  away  of  Hagar  and 
Ishmael,  Sacrifice  of  Isaac. 

xxiii.,  P,  Death  of  Sarah,  Precedent  as  to  sale  of  land. 

xxiv.,  J,  Eliezer,  Rebecca,  and  Isaac. 

XXV.  1-18,  P;  except  1-6,  ii<^,  i8  =  JE,  Death  and 
descendants  of  Abraham  and  Ishmael. 

XXV.  19-34,  J;  except  19/,  26^  =  P,  Birth  of  Esau  and 
Jacob,  Birthright  sold. 

xxvi.  1-33,  J;  except  1-5  (parts  of),  15,  18  =  R'^  Isaac  and 
Abimelech. 

xxvi.  34,  35,  P,  Esau's  Wives. 

*  WiNCKLER,  p.  303.  *  Mostly;  so  elsewhere. 


GENESIS  63 

xxvii.  f.,  JE ;  fxcept  xxvtt.  ^6-xxvni.  9  =  P,  Blessing  of 
Jacob  and  Esau,  Esau's  Wives,  Jacob's  Flight,  His  Dream 
at  Bethel. 

xxix.  i-xxxii.  I,  JE;  except  xxix,  24,  28^,  29,  xxxu 
i8*  =  P,  Jacob  and  Laban. 

xxxii.  2-xxxiii.,  JE;  except  xxxiii,  i8«  =  P,  Jacob  and 
Esau. 

xxxiv.  {constructed  on  a  J  basis  by  a  later ^  probably  priestly^ 
writer\  Dinah,  Sack  of  Shechem. 

XXXV.  i-22«,  E;  except  9-13,  15  =  P,  21,  220  =  J,  Jacob  at 
Bethel,  Death  of  Deborah  and  Rachel. 

XXXV.  2  2b-xxxvii.  i,  P ;  except  xxxvi.  31-39  =  J,  Family 
of  Jacob,  Death  of  Isaac,  Descendants  of  Esau,  Princes  of 
Edom. 

xxxvii.  2-36,  JE;  except  2d!  =  P,  Joseph  and  his  Brethren. 

xxxviii.,  J,  Judah  and  Tamar. 

xxxix.-xlviii.,  JE;  except  xli.  46,  xlvi.  6-27,  xlvti.  5^,  6a, 
7-1 1,  27/,  xlviii.  3-7  =  P,  Joseph  in  Egypt,  Brethren  and 
Jacob  come  thither. 

Egyptian  papyri  give  a  story  in  which  an  elder  brother,  his  wife,  and  a 
younger  brother  play  the  parts  of  Potiphar,  his  wife,  and  Joseph. 

xlix.  1-28,  The  Blessing  of  Jacob. 

An  ancient  lyric,  incorporated  either  by  J  or  RJ^.  Both  Judah,  10,  and 
Joseph,  26,  are  spoken  of  as  royal  tribes,  which  might  be  possible  in 
a  poem  of  the  time  of  David  or  Solomon,  but  would  be  more  natural 
after  Jeroboam ;  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  no  hint  that  Levi  is  a 
sacerdotal  tribe,  hence  the  Blessing  was  composed  before  621.  It  is 
probably  based  on  much  older  poems.     Verse  28  =  R. 

Addis,  878-857,  J  ;  Cornill,  after  Jeroboam,  before  850,  J ;  Dillmann 
and  Driver,  p.  17,  Reign  of  David  or  Solomon,  J ;  Kautzsch,  Reign  of 
David  ;  Kuenen,  p.  240,  tenth  or  ninth  century ;  Gunkel,  c,  1000-950. 

xlix.  29-1,  J;  except  xlix  29-33,  /.  12/ =  P;  /.  i5-26  =  E, 
Death  of  Jacob  and  Joseph. 

(c)  Use  in  N.T. — Chapter  ii.  24  is  used  by  our  Lord  to 
enforce  the  sanctity  of  marriage  (Matt.  xix.  5),  and  by  St.  Paul, 
in  Eph.  V.  31,  as  a  reason  for  conjugal  aifection  and  a  symbol 
of  the  relation  of  Christ  and  the  Church,  and,  in  i  Cor.  vi.  i6, 
to  show  the   heinousness   of  fornication.      Chapter  xv.   6, 


64  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Abraham's  faith  is  used  in  Rom.  iv.  3,  Gal.  iii.  6,  Jas.  ii.  23. 
There  are  other  quotations  and  numerous  references  to  the 
history,  especially  to  show  that  the  promises  made  to  the 
patriarchs  are  fulfilled  in  Christ,  and  that  the  freedom  of 
God's  election  is  illustrated  by  the  choice  of  Jacob  rather 
than  Esau. 

24.  Exodus. 

(a)  Title.— \x\  the  Hebrew  Bible,  W^elleh  Skemofh,  from 
the  opening  words ;  LXX.,  Vulg.,  and  other  versions.  Exodus^ 
as  narrating  the  departure  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt. 

(b)  Archeology. — No  reference  has  yet  been  found  to  the 
Exodus  in  the  monuments.  From  considerations  as  to  where 
it  would  best  fit  in  to  what  we  know  of  Egyptian  history,  the 
Exodus  has  been  placed  in  various  periods,  and  numerous 
Egyptian  kings  have  figured  at  different  times  as  the  Pharaohs 
of  the  Oppression  or  the  Exodus.  Attempts  are  also  made 
to  combine  the  Biblical  chronology,  which,  however,  affords 
no  clear  or  certain  data,  with  that  of  Egypt,  which  is  also 
only  approximately  known.  The  results  are  naturally  unsatis- 
factory. Popular  handbooks  often  refer  to  Rameses  II., 
c.  1300,  as  the  Pharaoh  of  the  Oppression,  and  his  son 
and  successor,  Merenptah  XL,  as  the  Pharaoh  of  the 
Exodus.^  But  this  is  only  one  of  many  possible  theories, 
and  the  discovery  of  an  inscription  of  Merenptah's,  in 
which  he  claims  to  have  subdued  Israelites  in  Syria,  renders 
it  less  probable  than  some  others. 

(c)  Contents. 

i.,  JE ;  except  1-7  =  P,  Oppression  in  Egypt. 

ii.  1-22,  JE,  Youth  of  Moses. 

ii.  23-vi.  27,  JE;  except  it.  23^,  vi.  2-2 7  =  P,  Call  of 
Moses,  Mission  of  Moses  and  Aaron  to  the  Israelites  and 
Pharaoh,  Genealogy  of  Moses  and  Aaron. 

vi.  28-xi.  (xii.  29  f.,  JE),  JE  ;  except  vi.  28^,  vii.  1-13,  19- 
22,*  via.  1-3,  12-15,  ix.  8-12,  xi.  9/  =  P,  Ten  Plagues. 

*  So  Sayce,  Higher  Criticism^  pp.  237  flF.,  mainly  because  Rameses  II. 
is  known  from  Egyptian  inscriptions  to  hare  built  Pithom.  (Exodus  i.  11.) 


EXODUS  65 

xii.  i-xiii.  16,  P;  except  xii.  29-39,  42  =  JE;  xii,  21-27, 
xiii,  3-16  =  R'^,  Institution  of  Passover. 

xiii.  17-XV.  21,  JE;  except  xiii,  20,  xiv.  1-4,  8/,  15-18, 
2\ff.,*  26-29*=  P,  Red  Sea. 

XV.  1-19,  Moses'  Song  of  Triumph;  a  lyric  inserted  by  E 
or  RJ^.  It  is  later  than  the  Conquest,  1 7,  but  may  rest  on  a 
more  ancient,  possibly  even  Mosaic  basis. 

XV.  20-xvii.,  JE;  except  xvi.  1-3,  6-24,"*  3i"-36,  xvii.  i*  = 
P,  Marah,  Manna,  Quails,  Water  from  the  Rock  at  Massah- 
Meribah,  Amalek. 

For  the  Quails,  here  P,  cf.  the  fuller  story  in  Numbers  xi, ,  J ;  for  the 
Water  from  the  Rock,  here  JE,  cf.  Numbers  xx.  1-13,  P. 

xviii.,  E,  traces  of  J  or  R^^  in  i/,  9^,  Jethro. 

xix.  I -XX.  21,  JE;  except  i,  2a  =  P^  and  traces^  6,  etc.^  of  R° 
or  R^  in  xx.  2-17,  The  Ten  Commandments  given  from 
Sinai. 

The  Decalogue,  xx.  2-17,  is  generally  held  to  have  been  incorporated  in 
E  ;  but  the  substance  is  older  than  E,  and  may  have  been  taken  from  the 
tables  of  stone  in  the  Ark.  Addis  dates  the  Decalogue  in  the  eighth  or 
seventh  century.     Cf.  Deuteronomy  v.  6-21. 

From  xix.  i  onwards,  the  scene  of  the  rest  of  Exodus,  the  whole  of 
Leviticus,  and  Numbers  i.  i-x.  10  is  SINAI. 

XX.  22-xxiii.  19,  The  Book  of  the  Covenant. 

The  Book  of  the  Covenant,  cf.  §§  4-16,  is  generally  held  to  have  been 
incorporated  in  E,  or  possibly  by  RJ^  in  JE  ;  it  was  edited  in  various  ways 
before  and  at  the  time  of  its  incorporation.  It  is  an  ancient  code  of  social 
law  and  ritual,  probably  not  older  than  the  monarchy,  but  at  least  as  old 
as  the  earliest  editions  of  J  and  E.  Many  of  the  laws  it  contains  may  be 
much  older  still. 

xxiii.  20-33,  'E',  except  22^-2 ^a,  31^-33  (against  intercourse 
with  the  Canaanites)  =  R^,  Promises  of  Blessing  if  the  Law  is 
observed. 

xxiv.  if.,  9fr.,  J  (or  E'),  Moses,  Aaron,  Nadab,  Abihu,  etc., 
see  Jehovah. 

xxiv.  3-8,  R^^  (or  E  or  E''),  Covenant,  with  sacrifice,  to 
observe  the  Book  of  the  Covenant. 

xxiv.  i2fr.  (i8a^b,  xxxi.  i8b),  E  (or  E*  or  E"),  Moses  in  the 
Mountain  forty  days. 


66  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

xxiv.  15-xxxi.,  P;  except  xxiv.  \%a  fib^  xxxi,  i8^=E,  Moses 
in  the  Mountain,  receives  instructions  for  the  Tabernacle  and 
its  appurtenances,  and  for  the  vestments  and  consecration  of 
the  priests,  Aaron  and  his  sons. 

xxxii.-xxxiii.,  JE,  Golden  Calf. 

xxxiv.  1-28,  J,  with  editorial  additions^  a  code  parallel  to 
E's  Decalogue  and  Book  of  the  Covenant. 

Written,  according  to  the  narrative — here,  probably,  RJ^  — on  the 
tables  of  stone,  which  replaced  those  broken  by  Moses.  The  writing, 
however,  is  quite  different  from  that  on  the  first  tables. 

xxxiv.  29-xl.,  P,  Moses  descends  from  the  Mountain,  and 
carries  out  the  instructions  given  in  xocv,-xxxi. 

The  narrative  here  is  mostly  obtained  from  the  instructions  by  altering 
the  tenses.  The  LXX.  text  differs  widely  from  the  Hebrew,  especially  in 
the  order,  cf.  Driver,  37  f. 

(d)  Use  in  N.T. — There  are  numerous  references  to  the 
history,  especially  in  the  historical  retrospects  in  Acts  and 
Hebrews;  and  to  the  Laws,  especially  the  Decalogue.  St. 
Paul  uses,  as  illustrations  of  God's  free  election,  the  reference 
to  Pharaoh  in  ix.  16,  and  xxxiii.  1%  cf,  Romans  ix.  15,  17. 

25.  Leviticus. 

The  scene  of  the  whole  book  is  SINAI. 

(a)  Title. — Hebrew,  Wayyiqrd\  from  the  opening  word; 
LXX.,  Leuitikon ;  Vulg.,  and  other  versions,  Leviticus^  as 
containing  the  Levitical  laws. 

(b)  Afialysis. — The  whole  book  is  Priestly  Code,  in- 
corporating the  Law  of  Holiness,  in  xvii.-xxvi.,  etc. 

(c)  Contents, — i-x.,  The  Sacrifices. 

xi.,  Clean  and  Unclean  Animals  (?  H). 

Cf.  Deuteronomy  xiv.  3-20. 

xii..  Purification  after  Childbirth. 

xiii.  f.,  Leprosy. 

XV.,  Sexual  Uncleanness. 

xvi.,  Day  of  Atonement. 


NUMBERS  67 

Law  of  Holiness^  xvii.-xocvi. 

xvii.,  Law  of  Slaughter ;  at  the  Tabernacle  only, 
xviii.,  Unlawful  Marriages,  etc. 
xix.  f.,  Various  Laws, 
xxi.  f.,  Cleanness  of  Priests,  Sacrifices, 
xxiii..  Feasts. 
xxi  v.,  Various  Laws. 
XXV.,  Sabbatical  Year,  Jubilee. 

xxvi..  Exhortation  to  keep  the  preceding  laws,  enforced 
by  promises  and  threats. 

xxvii..  Vows  and  Tithes. 

Verse  34  may  have  been  added  by  the  editor  who  divided  the  Pentateuch 
into  five  books,  as  a  suitable  conclusion  for  Leviticus,  Kuenen,  p.  341,  cf. 
Numbers  xxxvi.  13. 

(d)  Use  in  N.T. — There  are  references  to  some  of  the 
laws;  xviii.  5  is  quoted  Rom.  x.  5,  Gal.  iii.  12;  xix.  2, 
"Be  ye  holy,  because  I  am  holy,"  etc.,  i  Pet.  i.  16;  xix.  18, 
"Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself,"  Matt.  xix.  19, 
Rom.  xiii.  9,  etc.;  cf.  xxvi.  12,  2  Cor.  vi.  16. 

26.  Numbers. 

(a)  Title. — In  Hebrew,  according  to  Jerome  Wayyedabber^ 
the  opening  word,  but  in  the  MSS.  and  printed  editions 
BeMidbar  =  "  in  the  wilderness  of,"  a  word  in  the  first 
verse,  which  would  serve  to  describe  the  position  of  the 
Israelites  during  the  events  narrated  in  the  book;  LXX., 
Arithmoi^  Vulg.  Numeric  English  versions,  Nu77ibers^  because 
the  book  contains  the  enumerations  of  the  Israelites. 

(b)  Contents. — i.  i-x.  10,  P,  At  Sinai,  First  Census  of  the 
Israelites  who  left  Egypt,  Duties  of  the  Levites,  Laws  of  the 
Nazarites,  etc..  Offerings  for  the- Tabernacle,  Laws  as  to  the 
Levites,  the  Passover,  Second  Passover,  Silver  Trumpets,  etc. 

X.  11-28,  P,  Departure  from  Sinai,  Order  of  March. 

X.  29-xii.,  JE,  Hobab  asked  to  remain  with  Israel, 
Departure  from  Sinai,  Quails,  Seventy  Elders  who  prophesy, 
Miriam  and  Aaron  murmur  against  Moses,  Miriam's  Leprosy. 


68  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

In  xi.  two  entirely  independent  stories,  that  of  the  Quails  and  that 
of  the  Seventy  Elders,  are  curiously  combined.  Apart  from  editorial 
additions,  the  story  of  the  Quails  belongs  to  J,  that  of  the  Elders 
to  E  or  possibly  to  RJ^.  There  is  a  brief  reference  to  the  Quails  in 
P,  Exodus  xvi.   13,  before  the  arrival  at  Sinai. 

xiii.  f.,  P;  except  xiii.  173-20.  22/!,  27-31,  32,*  33,  xiv, 
1-4,*  8/,  11-25,  39-45  =y^,  Spies,  Evil  Report  of  all  but 
Caleb  and  Joshua,  Discouragement  of  the  People,  All  but 
Caleb  and  Joshua  to  die  during  forty  years  wandering  in 
the  Wilderness,  The  People  seek  to  enter  Canaan,  but  are  de- 
feated at  Hormah. 

XV.,  P,  Various  Laws,  Stoning  of  the  Sabbath  Breaker. 

xvi.  la,  2-1 1,  16-24,  35-50,1  xvii.  =  P,  Korah  and  the 
Levites  attempt  to  exercise  priestly  functions,  and  are  con- 
sumed by  fire  from  Jehovah,  Plague,  Aaron's  rod  buds 
as  a  token  of  the  exclusive  right  of  the  Levites  to  the 
Priesthood. 

An  earlier  Priestly  Narrative,  in  which  Korah's  fate  enforced  the 
rights  of  the  whole  tribe  of  Levi  as  against  the  other  tribes,  xvi.  3, 
xvii.,  has  been  modified  to  enforce  the  claims  of  the  house  of  Zadok 
or  Aaron,  as  in  Ezekiel  and  P,  against  the  Levites,  xvi.  8-10. 

xvi.  lb,  12-15,  23-34  =  JE,  The  Reubenites,  Dathan  and 

Abiram,  rebel  against  Moses ;  the  earth  opens  and  swallows 

them  up  with  their  families. 

The  authors  of  Deuteronomy  xi.  6  and  Psalm  cvL  1 7  were  acquainted 
with  a  story  concerning  Dathan  and  Abiram,  but  not  Korah  or  On. 
In  xxvii.  3,  P,  Korah  is  mentioned,  without  any  reference  to  Dathan, 
etc.  The  name  of  On,  who  is  only  mentioned  in  xvi  i,  should  probably 
be  omitted  as  due  to  a  corruption  of  the  text  through  the  accidental 
repetition  of  some  of  the  consonants.  Korah  has  been  introduced  into 
verses  24,  27,  and  32  by  the  editor  who  combined  JED  and  P  in  xvi. 

xviii.  f,  P,  Tithes  and  other  Dues  of  the  Priests  and 
Levites,  The  Water  of  Separation  for  purifying  anyone  who 
has  touched  a  corpse. 

XX.  f.,  JEj  except  XX.  1-13,*  22-29,  xxu  10/ =  P,  Death 

of  Miriam,  Water  from   the   Rock  at   Meribah,   Death   of 

Aaron,  Israel  defeats  Arad  and  the  Canaanites  at  Hormah, 

Brazen  Serpent,  List  of  Halting  Places,  Overthrow  of  Sihon 

and  Og. 

*  E.V.  xvi.  36-50,  xvii.  1-13  =  Heb.  xvii.  1-28. 


NUMBERS 


69 


For  the  Water  from  the  Rock  at  Meribah,  here  P,  cf.  the  parallel 
narrative  in  JE,  Exodus  xvii.  1-7,  at  Massah- Meribah,  before  the  arrival 
at  Sinai. 

The  incident  at  Hormah,  xxi.  1-3,  is  probably  J',  (/i  the  parallel 
in  Judges  i.  17=}^;  also  xiv.  45,  probably  E,  and  Deuteronomy  i.  44, 
probably  based  on  E.  The  List  of  Halting  Places,  xxi.  12-20,  is  an 
older  ^  document  incorporated  by  E  or  RJ^.  All  the  poems  in  xxi. 
may  be  from  the  "Book  of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah"  mentioned  in 
verse  14,  which  may  also  be  the  source  of  other  poems  in  the  historical 
books ;  nothing  more  is  known  of  this  work.  According  to  Addis  and 
others,  the  poem  in  xxi.  27  ff.  is  a  composition  of  the  ninth  century 
in  which  the  Israelites  celebrated  their  conquests  in  Moab.  Heshbon, 
the  city  of  Sihon,  is  here  (verse  30)  amongst  the  Moabite  cities  which  had 
been  sacked.  If  so,  Sihon  is  here  a  Moabite  king,  and  "to  Sihon,  king 
of  the  AmoriUs"  in  verse  29,  is  an  editorial  addition.  The  Conquest  of 
Og  in  33  ff.  was  not  originally  part  of  the  same  story  as  the  Conquest 
of  Sihon,  but  was  added  by  RJ^  or  R^- 

xxii.  ff.,  JE,*  Balak  and  Balaam. 

The  following  more  detailed  analysis  is  somewhat  uncertain,  especially 
as  to  the  passages  assigned  to  J  : — 


xxii. 

xxiii. 

xxiv. 

p 

I 

J 

22-25 

I-19 

E 

8-21*  35-41* 

1-26 

JE 

2-7 

27-30 

25 

R 

20-24 

In  xxiv.  20-24  "Assyria"  is  sometimes  taken  literally,  and  R  will 
be  RJ*^ ;  or  "Assyria"  may  be  the  Seleucid  kingdom  of  Syria,  in  which 
case  the  addition  must  have  been  made  in  the  Greek  period.  Apart 
from  this  and  other  editorial  additions,  the  oracles  uttered  by  Balaam 
belong  to  the  early  monarchy,  perhaps  to  the  period  of  David  and 
Solomon.  Their  unqualified  exultation  in  the  strength  and  glory  of 
Israel  reflects  a  period  of  great  national  prosperity,  and  xxiv.  17  f. 
may  refer  to  the  Conquest  of  Edom  and  Moab  by  David.  The  silence 
as  to  Judah  suggests  composition  in  Northern  Israel.  Some  critics,  e.g.^  Von 
Gall  (quoted  Gray,  Num.,  p.  314),  regard  all  the  poems  as  post-exilic. 

XXV.  1-5,  JE,  the  Moabites  corrupt  Israel. 


7&  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

XXV.  6-18,  P,  Phinehas  slays  an  Israelite  chief,  and  a  noble 
Midianite  woman  whom  he  had  taken  into  his  tent. 

Cf.  Ezra's  attack  upon  marriage  with  foreigners. 

xxvi.-xxxi.,  P,  Second  Census — of  the  children  of  those  who 
left  Egypt,  the  latter  having  all  perished  except  Joshua  and 
Caleb,^  Law  of  Inheritance  of  Females,  Joshua  Moses'  suc- 
cessor. Laws  of  Sacrifices  at  the  Feasts,  etc.,  and  of  Vows, 
Defeat  and  Extermination  of  the  Midianites,  Division  of  the 
Spoil  between  Israel  and  the  Tabernacle. 

xxxii.,  1-38,  Constructed  by  a  priestly  writer  on  the  basis  of  a 
JE  narrative.  The  allotment  of  Eastern  Palestine  to  Gad 
and  Reuben. 

Half  Manasseh  in  33  is  an  editorial  addition,  as  in  Joshua  xxii.,  which 
is  a  very  similar  document,  possibly  by  the  same  hand.  In  Numbers, 
however,  the  order  is  Gadites  and  Reubenites;^  in  Joshua,  Reubenites 
and  Gadites. 

xxxii.  39-42,  J;  except  ^0  =  ^^^  The  Conquest  of  Gilead  by 
the  Manassites,  Machir,  Jair,  and  Nobah. 

In  1-38,  Moses  gave  Gilead  to  Gad  and  Reuben ;  here  he  gives  it  to 
Machir  the  Manassite.  The  verses  were  probably  originally  connected 
with  Judges  i. 

xxxiii.  1-49,  Compiled  from  the  combined  PJED.  List  of 
the  Halting  Places  during  the  Wandering. 

If,  as  seems  to  be  the  case,  verse  2  states  that  this  list  was  written  by 
Moses,  it  is  probably  an  independent  summary  of  the  history  of  the 
Wandering,  and  came  into  the  hands  of  a  late  editor,  who  gave  it  this 
heading  and  added  it  to  the  Pentateuch.  Verse  2,  however,  may  mean 
that  the  list  was  based  on  some  document  or  documents  attributed  to 
Moses,  possibly  PJED,  or  JED. 

xxxiii.  50-xxxvi.,  P,  Jehovah  instructs  Moses  concerning  the 
Borders  of  the  Promised  Land,  the  Princes  who  are  to  divide 
it  amongst  the  People,  the  Levitical  Cities,  the  Cities  of 
Refuge,  and  the  Law  of  Murder.  Moses  lays  down  a  law 
as  to  the  Marriage  of  Female  Heirs. 

Kuenen,  p.  341,  Addis,  etc.,  regard  xxxvi.  13,  as  added  by  the  editor 
who  divided  the  Pentatench  into  five  books,  as  a  suitable  conclusion  for 

*  Moses  is  overlooked. 

*  Except  in  i,  possibly  altered  by  an  editor. 


DEUTERONOMY  71 

Numbers.  Since,  however,  it  is  immediately  contradicted  by  Deuteronomy 
i.  I,  which  that  editor  must  have  had  under  consideration,  there  is  less 
difficulty  in  supposing  that  it  is  P's  conclusion  of  his  legislation,  imitated 
by  the  editor  who  added  Leviticus  xxvii.  34. 

(c)  Use  in  N.T. — In  addition  to  references  to  the  history, 
2  Timothy  ii.  19  is  perhaps  suggested  by  the  LXX.  of  xvi.  5, 
•*  God  knows  them  that  are  His,"  /.<?.,  the  faithful,  in  contrast 
to  Korah  and  his  company. 

27.  Deuteronomy,  cf.  §§  1-18,  especially  §§  17  f. 

(a)  Title. — Hebrew,  ^Elleh  had-Debharim^  the  opening 
words ;  also  spoken  of  as  Mishneh^  because  regarded  as  a 
recapitulation  of  the  laws  in  the  previous  books;  similarly, 
LXX.,  Deuteronomion^  the  Second  Law;  hence  Vulg.  Deut- 
eronomium ;  and  E.V.  Deuteronomy. 

(b)  Analysis, — Chapters  i-xxx.  consist  of  the  various  strata 
of  D,  incorporating  material  borrowed  by  the  Deuteronomic 
writers  from  J  and  E  or  JE;  with  slight  additions  by  the 
priestly  writers.  The  analysis  of  xxxi.-xxxiv.  will  be  given 
under  the  various  sections. 

(c)  Contents, — i.  i-iv.  40,  First  introductory  Historical 
Retrospect  and  Exhortation. 

Based  on  E  or  JE,  by  a  different  hand  from  xii.-xxvi.,  and  added  to 
Josiah's  law-book  after  its  publication,  but  before  it  was  combined  with 
JE.  The  archaeological  details  as  to  the  original  inhabitants  of  Canaan, 
ii.  10  ff,,  20-23,  are  obvious  additions,  probably  marginal  notes  by  a 
reader,  which  have  slipped  into  the  text.  The  exhortation,  iv.  9-40,  is 
sometimes  (Cornill,  Addis,  etc.)  ascribed  to  a  different  author  to  the  rest 
of  this  introduction. 

iv.  41  ff..  Cities  of  Refuge,  E  of  Jordan.  An  isolated  fragment,  quite 
unconnected  with  its  context.  It  is  a  correction  of  xix.  9,  which  directs 
the  establishment  of  three  cities  at  once,  three  more  will  be  appointed  if 
the  territory  of  Israel  is  increased.  Who  composed  these  verses,  and  why 
they  were  placed  here,  is  a  mystery.  They  may  be  by  a  Deuteronomic 
writer  to  supplement  xix.  9,  or  by  a  priestly  writer  to  conform  to  P's  pro- 
vision of  six  cities  of  refuge. 

iv.  44-49,  Introductory  Statement  of  the  occasion  on  which 
the  Deuteronomic  Laws  were  promulgated. 

Probably  the  original  heading  of  Josiah's  law-book,  although  either  44 
or  the  whole  paragraph  is  held  by  some  to  be  a  later  addition.  The  para- 
graph may  have  been  the  introduction  to  an  edition  containing  iv.  44- 
xxvi. 


72  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

v.-xi.,  Hortatory  Introduction  to  the  Deuteronomic  Code, 
including  a  Second  Edition  of  the  Decalogue,  Exhortations 
to  obey  the  Law,  to  avoid  idolatry,  and  to  have  no  dealings 
with  the  idolatrous  Canaanites.  These  exhortations  are  en- 
forced by  appeals  to  their  experience  of  the  rewards  of 
obedience,  and  the  punishment  of  rebellion  during  the 
Wanderings. 

In  v.-xxvi.,  the  mode  of  address  varies,  sometimes  the  second  person 
singular,  "  thou  shalt,"  is  used  ;  sometimes  the  plural,  "ye  shall"  ;  some- 
times the  third  person  singular,  "a  man  shall."  Attempts  have  been 
made  ^  to  use  these  as  criteria  of  different  sources. 

Chapters  v.-xi.  may  either  be  part  of  the  original  law-book;  so  Addis, 
ii.  25,  Driver,  p.  87,  Konig,  p.  210,  Marti  (Kautzsch,  Bibel),  Ryle  (Hast- 
ings' Bible  Dictionary),  Steuernagel ;  or  composed  later  than  xii.-xxvi., 
but  by  the  same  author,  Kuenen,  p.  212  ;  or  they  may  be  a  later  addition 
by  a  different  author,  Cornill,  Holzinger,  p.  275,  Wellhausen,  History^ 
p.  369. 

D  borrowed  the  Decalogue,  v.  6-21,  either  from  JE  or  E,  or,  like  E, 
may  have  known  it  as  an  independent  document ;  he  edited  it  in  his 
characteristic  style  and  spirit,  cf.  Exodus  xx.  The  historical  references  in 
v.-xi.  are  to  J E  or  to  the  separate  E. 

Chapter  x.  1-9  (10),  (The  writing  of  the  second  set  of  tables  of  stone, 
the  command  to  make  the  Ark,  the  setting  apart  of  the  tribe  of  Levi),  in- 
terrupt the  obvious  connection  between  ix.  29,  and  x.  10 '^  or  11,  and  are 
probably  a  later  addition.  Verses  6  f.  have  no  connection  with  1-5,  8,  9, 
and  are  utterly  out  of  place.  They  are  often  regarded  as  a  piece  of  jet- 
sam and  flotsam  from  E,  which,  by  some  strange  misadventure,  has  drifted 
on  to  an  alien  shore,  cf.  E's  list  of  halting  places  in  Numbers  xxL  If  so, 
the  reference  to  Eleazar  is  an  addition  of  a  priestly  editor,  for,  with  the 
very  doubtful  exceptions  of  this  passage,  and  Joshua  xxiv.  33,'  neither  J 
nor  E  refer  to  Eleazar  or  Phinehas. 

Chapter  xi.  29  f.  are  also  an  addition  by  the  Deuteronomic  author  of 
Joshua  viii.  30-35. 

XII.-XXVL,  The  Deuteronomic  Code*  (containing  the 
laws  on  which  JosiaKs  reforms ^  621,  were  based). 

^  Especially  by  Stark  and  Steuernagel,  as  criteria  of  authorship, 
by  which  v.-xxvi.  may  be  resolved  into  earlier  sources.  The  differ- 
ences may  very  well  indicate  the  presence  of  earlier  material  and  later 
additions,  but  scarcely  enable  us  to  determine  the  literary  history  of  these 
chapters. 

'^  Verse  10  is  clearly  written  with  reference  to  ix.  29,  but  it  may  be  the 
work  of  an  editor  who  tried  to  mend  the  confusion  caused  by  the  intro- 
duction of  X.  1-9. 

3  q.v.y  also  probably  by  a  priestly  editor, 

*  For  Contents  see  next  page. 


DEUTERONOMY  73 

These  chapters,  like  v.-xi.,^  have  been  analysed  into  earlier  sources, 
whose  distinctive  marks  are  the  singular  and  plural  forms  of  address ;  but 
this  analysis  has  met  with  little  acceptance.  The  Code  is  an  amended 
and  expanded  edition  of  the  JE  laws,  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  and 
the  Decalogue,  etc.;^  some  laws  it  repeats,  either  verbatim  or  with 
explanations  and  slight  modifications,  e.g.^  the  Decalogue;  some  it 
omits,  e.g.^  Exodus  xxi.  i8-xxii.  15,  the  compensation  to  be  given  for 
injuries;  and  some  it  expands,  or  corrects,  e.g..^  the  single  verse, 
Exodus  xxii.  20,  prohibiting  the  worship  of  strange  gods,  is  expanded 
into  a  long  paragraph,  Deuteronomy  xvii.  2-7,  specifying  the  sun,  moon, 
and  stars  as  *'  other  gods,"  and  appointing  the  procedure  to  be  observed  in 
dealing  with  their  worshippers.  Again,  the  law  limiting  sacrifice,  Deuter- 
onomy xii.  is  a  correction  of  Exodus  xx.  24,  which  permits  sacrifice 
at  many  sanctuaries.  Also,  the  Code  introduces  many  new  laws,  e.g.^  those 
limiting  the  priesthood  to  the  tribe  of  Levi.  For  various  other  details  see 
under  the  separate  sections. 

xii.  i-xiv.  21,  The  worship  of  Other  Gods  and  the  use 
of  Foreign  Superstitious  Customs  to  be  avoided  by  confining 
sacrifice  to  One  Sanctuary,  Animals  may  be  slaughtered  any- 
where, Practices,  etc.  which  are  to  be  avoided,  Punishment 
of  those  who  observe  or  encourage  such  practices,  List  of 
Animals  which  may  and  may  not  be  eaten. 

This  latter  list,  xiv.  3-21,  agrees  almost  exactly  with  Leviticus  xi.  2-23, 
which  is  probably  H.  Apparently  the  list  was  older  than  both  D  and  H, 
and  was  used  by  both.  The  list  is  sometimes  regarded  as  a  later  addition 
toD». 

xiv.  22-xv.,  Tithes  and  Year  of  Release. 
xvi.  1-17,  Yearly  Feasts. 
xvi.  i8-xvii.  13,  Law  Courts. 

The  sections  prohibiting  the  use  of  Asheras  and  Ma99ebas,  the  offering 
of  unsuitable  sacrifices,  xvi.  22-xvii.  I,  have  no  connection  with  the  con- 
text, and  must  be  misplaced. 

xvii.  14-19,  Law  for  the  King. 

xviii.  1-8,  Provision  for  the  Levites. 

xviii.  9-22,  Prophets,  How  to  distinguish  the  True  from  the 
False. 

xix.  i-xxiii.  i.  Laws  concerning  Murder,  Cities  of  Refuge, 
Landmarks,  Perjury,  War,  Authority  of  Parents,  etc.,  Benevo- 
lence to  Fellow-countrymen,  Judicial  procedure  as  to  charges 
of  Unchastity,  etc. 

*  See  above  on  v.-xi.  *  See  Table  in  Driver,  p.  68. 


74  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

xxiii.  2-xxv.,  Laws  as  to  the  exclusion  of  members  of 
neighbouring  tribes  from  the  Assembly,  Runaway  slaves  not 
to  be  sent  back,  Interest,  Vows,  Divorce,  Provision  for  the 
Poor,  Punishments,  Marriage  with  Deceased  Brother's  Wife, 
etc.,  Curse  on  Amalek. 

xxvi.,  Firstfruits,  Tithe  in  Third  Year,  Closing  Exhortation. 

Although  the  main  section  of  D'  closes  here,  probably  xxriii.  also 
belongs  to  that  document. 

xxvii.,  The  Law,  i.e.^  D',  to  be  written  on  stones,  and  set  up 
on  Mount  Ebal ;  also  an  altar  to  be  set  up  on  Mount  Ebal, 
and  curses  to  be  proclaimed. 

This  chapter,  which  breaks  the  connection  between  xxvi.  and  xxviii.,  is 
a  series  of  later  additions.  Verses  9  f.  may  be  the  connecting  link  between 
xxvi.  and  xxviii.,  i.e.,  D*,  if  xxviii.  is  D',  if  not  by  the  Deuteronomic 
editor  who  added  xxviii.  Verses  1-8,  11-13  are  closely  connected  with 
xi.  29  f.  and  Joshua  viii.  30-35,  and  are  by  the  same  hand  or  hands. 
Verses  6  f.  which  order  the  erection  of  an  altar  cannot  have  been 
originally  written  by  a  Deuteronomist,  because  they,  at  any  rate,  seem 
to  contradict  the  Law  of  the  One  Sanctuary.  As  Shechem  lay  between 
Ebal  and  Gerizim,  they  may  be  a  fragment  of  E,  to  which  1-5,  8 
have  been  added  as  a  kind  of  correction.  Verses  14-26,  of  which 
Joshua  viii.  30-35  take  no  notice,  and  which  are  not  Deuteronomic  in 
style,  must  be  a  very  late  addition. 

xxviii.,  D',  The  Rewards  of  Obedience,  and  the  Punish- 
ment of  Disobedience. 

Ascribed  to  D'  by  Addis,  Driver,  p.  67,  Kuenen,  p.  124,  Marti,  Ryle, 
etc.;  to  a  later  Deuteronomic  writer  by  Cornill,  p.  21  f.,  Wellhausen, 
p.  369,  etc.     If  D ',  there  are  later  additions. 

xxix.  f.,  An  Exhortation  to  Obedience,  enforced  by  Promises 
and  Threats. 

A  later  Deuteronomic  addition,  differing  somewhat  in  style  from  D*; 
also  XXX.  I -10  presupposes  the  Exile. 

xxxi..  Parting  Words  of  Moses  to  Israel,  Joshua,  and  the 
Levites.  Moses  finishes,  9,  24 f.,  writing  "the  words  of  this 
law,"  i.e.,  D,  "in  a  book,"  and  bids  the  Levites  put  the  book 
by  the  side  of  the  Ark. 

A  series  of  later  additions.  Verses  1-8  connect  closely  with  i.-iv. 
and  with  the  Deuteronomic  verses  in  Joshua  i.,  and  are  probably  by 
the  same  hand.  If  i.-iv.  is  accepted  as  D ',  these  verses  will  be  D  *. 
Verses  9  13,  the  direction  to  read  the  Law,  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 


DEUTERONOMY  75 

in  the  Year  of  Release,  may  be  D*.  The  references  to  Joshua,  14  f.,  23, 
are  probably  E,  edited  by  a  Deuteronomic  writer.  In  (a)  16-22  (?JE, 
so  Addis,  Kuenen,  p.  256)  (b)  24-30  we  have  two  separate  introductions 
to  the  Song  of  Moses.  In  24  ff.  Steuernagel  proposes  to  read  "Song," 
sMrdiox  ''\j3,-^,''  t6r&. 

xxxii.  1-43,  Song  of  Moses,  setting  forth  Jehovah's  love  to 

His  people,  their  apostasy  from  their  Rock,  Jehovah,  to  other 

gods,  their  punishment  and  ultimate  restoration. 

An  independent  poem.  Nothing  in  the  poem  itself  suggests  that  it 
was  composed  by  Moses.  It  looks  back  to  a  period  of  great  national 
prosperity,  accompanied  by  an  outburst  of  the  worship  of  other  gods. 
Israel  is  oppressed  by  a  nation,  which  is  soon  to  be  punished  for  its 
harshness  to  God's  people.  There  are  points  of  contact  with  Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel,  and  II.  Isaiah  ^  which  suggest  a  date  either  just  before  or  at  the 
beginning  of  the  Exile  ;  so  Addis,  Driver,  p.  89,  Konig,  p.  224,  all 
three  with  some  hesitation,  Kuenen,  p.  256,  etc.  ;  or  even  at  the  end 
of  the  Exile  or  later ;  so  Cornill,  Steuernagel,  etc.  If,  however,  Addis 
and  Kuenen  are  right  in  ascribing  xxxi.  14-22  to  JE,  and  therefore 
regarding  the  Song  as  part  of  JE,  we  must  either  date  JE  in  the 
Exile,  or,  more  probably,  place  the  Song  before  650,  regard  the 
oppressor  as  the  Assyrian,  and  suppose  that  the  parallels  to  Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel,  and  II.  Isaiah  are  partly  accidental,  partly  later  additions. 
Dillmann,  p.  394,  considers  that  the  Song  was  composed  c.  800,  and 
included  in  J.  It  is  more  likely  that  it  was  included  in  JED  by  its 
compiler  or  a  later  editor. 

xxxii.  44,  Subscription  to  the  Song. 

xxxii.  45-47,  Closing  Exhortation. 

Deuteronomic,  D »  or  later. 

xxxii.  48-52,  P,  Command  to  Moses  to  ascend  Mount 
Nebo,  to  die. 

xxxiii..  Blessing  of   Moses,  A  series  of  oracles  on  the 

tribes,  like  the  Blessing  of  Jacob. 

There  is  nothing  in  the  poem  to  suggest  Mosaic  authorship.  Verses 
4  £,  "Moses  commanded  us  a  law,"  etc.,  and  the  "he  said"s  which 
introduce  each  oracle  in  7-25,  indicate  that  it  was  written  on  the  basis 
of  ancient  oracles  ascribed  to  Moses.  Simeon  has  disappeared,  Reuben 
is  at  its  last  gasp,  Judah  is  in  distress,  and  the  Blessing  prays  that  he  may 
be  reunited  to  his  people  ;  but  Levi  flourishes  as  a  priestly  tribe,  Benjamin 
dwells  in  safety,  Joseph  enjoys  an  exuberant  prosperity,  Gad  is  powerful 
and  warlike,  and  the  other  northern  tribes  are  flourishing.  Possibly 
some  of  the  oracles  retain  features  which  were  no  longer  found  in  the 
position  of  the  tribes  where  the  Blessing  was  compiled,  and  the  oracle 
on  Levi  may  be  a  later  addition.  But  the  general  character  of  the 
poem  shows  that  it  was  written  by  a  native  of  the  northern  kingdom, 

^  Cf'  39.  Isa.  xli.  4,  xlviii.  12,  xlv.  $  ;  15,  Jer.  v.  28  ;  41,  Ezek. 
xxi.  9  f. 


76  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

when  that  state  was  at  the  height  of  its  power  and  prosperity,  and 
when  the  northern  kingdom  was  regarded  as  the  true  Israel,  from  which 
Judah  had  no  right  to  hold  aloof.  A  curious  feature  is  the  apparent 
grouping  of  Benjamin  with  the  northern  tribes.  The  conditions  are 
held  to  point  either  to  the  time  of  Jeroboam  I.,  so  Dillmann,  p.  415, 
Driver,  Deuteronomy  i.l.  ;  or  to  that  of  Jeroboam  II.,  so  Addis,  Cornill, 
Kuenen,  Steuernagel.  It  has  also  been  dated  in  the  period  of  the  Judges, 
Konig,  p.  202,  but  this  is  improbable. 

Its  northern  origin  suggests  a  connection  with  E,  so  Cornill  and 
Dillmann.  There  is  little  to  show  in  which  document  or  edition  of 
the  Pentateuch  it  was  first  included,  but  the  absence  of  Deuteronomic 
or  priestly  glosses  points  to  its  having  belonged  to  JE  or  E. 

Steuernagel  regards  2-5,  26-29  as  a  post-exilic  psalm,  and  9a,  lo  as  an 
addition,  earlier  than  P. 

xxxiv.,  P.;  except  1^-7,  10  =  JED,  11  f.  =  R°,  Death  and 
Burial  of  Moses. 

(d)  Use  in  N.  T. — Deuteronomy  is  used  in  several  import- 
ant passages,  especially  in  our  Lord's  utterances,  and  in 
Romans  and  Hebrews.  Owing  to  its  didactic  form,  it  lent 
itself  to  quotation ;  and  in  it,  as  in  II.  Isaiah,  O.T.  Revelation 
prepares  the  way  for,  and,  in  a  measure,  anticipates  the  gospel. 
The  three  O.T.  quotations  used  by  Christ  at  the  temptation 
are  Deuteronomy  vi.  13,  16,  viii.  3.  The  "first  of  all  the 
commandments.  .  .  .  Hear,  O  Israel,  the  Lord  our  God  is 
one  Lord,  and  thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God,  etc.," 
Mark  xii.  29  f.,  etc.,  the  opening  clause  of  the  Shema  or 
Jewish  Confession  of  Faith  is  from  Deuteronomy  vi.  4,  5. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Law  of  Divorce,  of  which  Jesus  said, 
"  For  the  hardness  of  your  heart  he  wrote  you  this  precept," 
Mark  x.  5,  etc.,  is  from  Deuteronomy  xxiv.  i.  The  promise 
of  xviii.  18,  that  God  would  raise  up  prophets  for  His  people, 
is  specially  applied  to  Christ  in  Acts  iii.  22,  vii.  37.  In 
Romans  x.  6-9,  what  is  said  in  praise  of  the  Law  in  Deu- 
teronomy xxx.  12 ff.,  is  applied  to  Christ;  cf.  also  Romans  x. 
19,  xi.  II,  xii.  19,  XV.  10,  with  Deuteronomy  xxxii.  2*1,  35,  43. 
Hebrews  i.  6,  "Let  all  the  angels  of  God  worship  him,"  is 
from  the  LXX.  of  Deuteronomy  xxxii.  43,  and  the  description 
of  the  scene  at  Sinai,  in  Hebrews  xii.  18  ff.,  is  from  Deuter- 
onomy iv.  II  f.,  V.  23-26.  Cf.  Deuteronomy  xxv.  4,  "Thou 
shalt  muzzle  the  ox,  etc.,"  with  i  Corinthians  ix.  9,  i  Timothy 
V.  18. 


JOSHUA  77 

28.  Joshua. 

(a)  Title. — The  book  is  named  after  the  main  character  in 
the  narrative,  not  after  the  author. 

(b)  Archxeology^ — The  Exodus  itself  cannot  be  brought 
directly  into  relation  with  what  is  known  from  the  inscriptions 
of  the  history  of  Egypt  and  Palestine;  but  the  narratives  of 
the  Conquest  may  be  in  some  measure  related  to  extra- 
Biblical  information.  Our  data  are  fairly  numerous.  It  is 
true  that,  individually,  many  of  them  are  uncertain,  especially 
as  to  the  reading  and  meaning  of  names ;  and  may  be  irre- 
levant; and  that  they  are  often  very  difficult  to  reconcile 
either  with  each  other,  or  with  even  the  oldest  Biblical  narra- 
tive. Yet  taken  together  they,  at  any  rate,  help  to  limit  the 
number  of  possible  theories. 

There  are  (i.)  a  number  of  apparent  references  to  the 
presence  of  Israelites  in  Palestine  extending  from  about  B.C. 
1500  to  about  B.C.  1200.  If  these  are  to  be  trusted,  they 
seem  to  indicate  either  that  the  Exodus  took  place  very  early 
before  1500;  or  that  it  took  place  after  1200,  and  that  in 
Genesis  the  narratives  of  the  Patriarchs  refer  either  to  chiefs 
of  tribes,  or  to  tribes  themselves;  or  that  only  a  portion  of 
the  Israelites  went  down  to  Egypt,  while  the  rest  remained  in 
Canaan.     The  references  are  as  follows : — 

At  Karnak,  in  a  list  of  Canaanite  towns  conquered  by 
Thothmes  III.,^  we  find  the  names  oi  Jacob-el  and  Joseph-el^ 
apparently  implying  a  long  prior  occupation  of  the  district  by 
the  tribes  of  Jacob  and  Joseph. 

From  the  archives  of  Amenophis  IV.,  the  Tel-el-Amarna 
tablets,  we  learn  that  in  his  reign,  ^  Southern  Palestine  (and 
perhaps  also  Northern^)  was  being  invaded  by  the  Habiri. 
A  theory  has  been  advanced,  and  has  met  with  some  support, 

*  C/!  §  24  (b).     For  some  of  the  following  references  I  am  indebted  to 
an  unpublished  paper  by  Dr.  Skinner,  Presbyterian  Coll.,  Camb, 
'  1481-1449,  Petri E,  Egypt ^  ii.  29. 
»  Petrie,  Egypt,  ii.  205,  B.C.  1383-1365- 
*  WiNCKLER,  p.  143,  the  rendering  is  uncertain  at  present. 


78  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

that  these  are  the  Hebrews.  ^  The  term  "  Hebrew,"  however, 
might  include  Moab,  Ammon,  and  Edom. 

In  the  inscriptions  of  Seti  I.  and  Rameses  II. ,2  a  name 
which  is  read  as  Asher  occurs  as  the  name  of  a  district,  in 
about  the  region  assigned  by  the  Book  of  Joshua  to  the  tribe 
of  Asher.  2 

In  an  inscription  of  Merenptah  11.,^  he  claims  to  have  sub- 
dued Israelites  in  Palestine. 

But  (ii.)  another  line  of  argument  also  points  to  a  late  date 
for  the  Conquest.  In  all  the  narratives,  the  deliverance  at  the 
Red  Sea  is  regarded  as  the  end  of  all  difficulties  with  Egypt. 
None  of  the  accounts  of  the  whole  period,  including  the 
Wandering,  the  Conquest,  the  Judges,  Saul  and  David,  hint 
at  the  presence  of  Egyptian  armies  or  officials  in  the  Sinaitic 
Peninsula,  or  in  Palestine.  Hence  we  ought  to  be  able  to  fix 
the  Exodus  at  the  beginning  of  a  period  of,  at  the  very  least, 
two  hundred  years,  during  which  Egypt  left  Palestine  entirely 
to  itself.  Such  a  period  is  difficult  to  find.  Thothmes  I.^ 
overran  the  hill-country  of  Palestine,  and  advanced  the 
Egyptian  frontier  to  the  Euphrates ;  his  successor,  Thothmes 
ll.f^  claims  dominion  over  Syria;  the  next  king,  Thothmes 
III.,^  subdued  Palestine  and  Syria  in  a  long  series  of  cam- 
paigns ;  his  successor,  Amenophis  III.,  also  fought  in  Syria. 
The  Tel-el-Amarna  tablets  seem  to  show  that  under  the  next 
king,  Amenophis  IV.,  the  Egyptian  dominion  in  Palestine 
was  lost  for  a  time,  but  it  was  recovered  by  Rameses  I.  and 
Seti  I,^  and  the  next  king,  Rameses  11.,^  fought  many  cam- 
paigns in    Syria.      His    successor,    Merenptah    II.,    claims 

2  Bn'i.  Mus.  Catalogue,  1366-1333-1300. 

3  MuLLER,  Asien  und  Europen,  p.  237. 

*  Petrie,  Egpyt^  i.  251,  B.C.  1208,  onward;  Brit.  Mus.  Catalogue^ 
1 300- 1 266. 

5  Id.,  ii.  64,  B.C.  1541-1516;  Brit.  Mus,  Catalogue,  1633-1600. 

*  Id.,  ii.  73,  1516-1503;  Brit.  Mus.  Catalogue,  1600. 

^  Id.,  ii.  100,  1 503- 1449 ;  Brit.  Mus.  Catalogue,  about  1600. 

8  Id.,  i.  251,  1328-1327-1275;  Brit.  Mus.  Catalogue,  1400- 1366- 1 333. 

»  /</.,  i.  251,  1275-1208;  Brit.  Mus.  Catalogue,  1333-1300. 


JOSHUA  79 

successes  in  Syria,  and  Rameses  III.^  also  fought  in  Syria. 
After  his  death,  Egypt  seems  to  have  lost  Syria,  and  the 
Egyptian  annals  record  no  invasion  of  Syria  until  the  reign  of 
Shishak  I.,^  the  contemporary  of  Jeroboam  I.  As  the 
Exodus  can  scarcely  have  taken  place  two  hundred  years 
before  Thothmes  I.,  it  seems  necessary  to  place  it  some  time 
after  the  death  of  Rameses  III. 

It  may  also  be  noted  that  the  Tel-el-Amarna  tablets  and 
other  inscriptions  show  that  Palestine  had  existed  for  many 
centuries  as  a  collection  of  tribes  and  city  states,  as  Joshua 
found  it  at  the  Conquest. 

(c)  Analysts. — The  history  of  the  Book  of  Joshua  is  some- 
what different  from  that  of  the  rest  of  the  Hexateuch,  and 
presents  some  problems  not  yet  solved.  The  groundwork 
is  not  P  as  in  the  first  five  books,  but  JED ;  the  combination 
of  P  and  JED  in  the  Pentateuch  and  in  Joshua  was  probably 
by  different  hands ;  R°  has  dealt  much  more  freely  with  his 
JE  material  in  Joshua,  than  in  the  earlier  sections.  His  work 
in  some  parts  seems  to  amount  to  a  rewriting  of  the  history 
on  the  basis  of  JE,  rather  than  a  mere  addition  of  editorial 
matter.  Hence  sections  which,  as  they  stand,  are  R^  may 
often  be  based  upon  and  include  JE  material,  which  can 
no  longer  be  separated  with  any  certainty.  Similarly,  it  is 
probable  that  P,  in  his  account  of  the  territories  of  the 
tribes,  makes  use  of  older  sources.  The  conception  of 
the  Conquest  as  effected  by  united  Israel,  in  a  single  war, 
under  Joshua,  which  is  absent  ^  from  J,  is  apparently  found 
in  E,  and  was  developed  and  systematised  in  part  perhaps 
by  R^%  but  more  thoroughly  by  R°.  Hence  there  is  some- 
times a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  whether  a  passage  belongs 
to  E,  R^^,  or  R°  Probably  R°  comprises  material  from  at 
least  two  hands.  The  characteristic  idea  introduced  by 
R°  is  that  Joshua  and  Israel  carefully  observed  the  Law^ 
of  Moses,  i.e.y  D',  during  the  life  of  Joshua  and  those  of 
his  contemporaries  who  survived  him. 

^  Brit.  Mus.  Catalogue,  about  1200. 
*  Brit.  Mus,  Catalogue,  966-933.  ^  Cf.  on  Judges  i. 


8o  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(d)  Consents.— I.'XlI.f  The  Conquest. 

i.   i-viii.  29,  JE;  except  i.  3-9,   11^-18,  it.  10^,  in.   7, 

io<5,  iv,  12,  14,  21-24,  ^«   1}  4/»*  ^'''  2<5.,*  15/^,*   i7<5,  18, 

24^,  27,  z/z/V.   i/,*  27  =  R^;   fl«d?  /«.  4,  iv.   10^.,*  13,   19, 

2>.    6/!,   10^,  w.    23<^,  z///.    I,    24^5  *  =  R^  or   P,  Directions 

for  crossing  the  Jordan,  Spies  and  Rahab,  Crossing  of  the 

Jordan,  Circumcision  of   the  People,  "The  Captain  of  the 

Army  of  Jehovah,"  Fall  of  Jericho,  The  unsuccessful  attack 

on  Ai,  Achan,  Fall  of  Ai. 

Chapter  v.  13-15,  *'The  Captain  of  the  Army  of  Jehovah,"  has  no 
connection  with  the  context,  and  may  be  a  fragment  of  an  unknown  source 
used  by  JE,  or  J  or  E.  Traces  of  late  language,  e.g.  "  Prince,"  ^  may  be 
due  to  editors,  or  the  fragment  may  have  been  given  its  present  form  and 
inserted  in  the  Hexateuch  by  a  late  editor. 

viii.  30-35,  R°,  Altar  on  Mount  Ebal,  Blessings  and 
Curses. 

Cf.  on  Deuteronomy  xi.  29  f.,  xxvil  1-8,  11-13,  where  instructions  are 
given  for  the  ceremony  here  performed.  Deuteronomy  xxvii.  apparently 
gives  directions  for  two  separate  acts,  the  erection  of  an  altar  and  the 
inscription  of  D*  on  stones ;  Joshua  seems  to  combine  the  two  into 
the  erection  of  an  altar  on  which  D^  is  inscribed.  Joshua  viil  30-35 
may  be  by  a  later  writer  who  misunderstood  Deuteronomy;  both  may 
be  by  the  author  of  Deuteronomy  xxvii.,  who  may  have  intended  the 
passage  as  to  the  inscription  as  an  interpretation  of  that  about  the 
altar,  which  he  took  from  an  older  source,  and  shaped  our  present 
passage  accordingly. 

ix.  i-x.  27,  JE;  except  ix.  i/,  9^,  10,  24/,  27^/?,  x.  8, 
19^,  25  =  R°;  ix.  15^,  17-21,  23^,  27^/3,  X.  2'jdl3*  =  R^  or  P, 
League  with  the  Gibeonites,  Battle  of  Bethhoron,  Sun  and 
Moon  stand  still. 

The  Book  of  Jashar,  cited  in  x.  12  f.,  is  mentioned  in  2  Samuel  i.  18  as 
containing  David's  Lamentation  over  Saul  and  Jonathan,  and  in  the 
original  text'  of  i  Kings  viii.  12  as  containing  the  short  poem  uttered 
by  Solomon.  It  must  have  been  a  collection  of  poems  compiled  during 
the  monarchy.  "Jashar"  means  upright ;  it  may  be  used,  like  Jeshurun, 
for  Israel;  or  it  may  be  a  collective  term  for  heroes.  In  the  original 
poem  the  words  about  the  sun  and  moon  were  figurative,  like  "the 
stars  in  their  courses  fought  against  Sisera"  in  the  Song  of  Deborah, 
Judges  v.  20. 

X.  28-xii.,  R°;  except  xi.   i,  4/,  7/*  =  JE,  Summary  of 

1  Sar,  E.V.  «  Captain." 

«  As  indicated  by  the  LXX.  (verse  53). 


JOSHUA  8i 

Joshua's  campaign  in  the  South,  Defeat  of  Jabin,  King  of 

Hazor,  Defeat  of  the  Anakim,  Brief  account  of  the  Districts 

Conquered,  List  of  Conquered  Kings. 

In  X.  28-39,  43  R°  probably  had  a  JE  basis.  The  passage  is  sometimes 
described  as  JE,  with  additions  by  R" 

XIII.-XXI.,  Division  of  the  Land. 

P  's  account  of  the  territories  of  the  tribes  has  been  compiled  from  con- 
flicting sources,  one  of  which  may  have  been  JE,  and  has  suffered  from 
textual  corruption.  The  lists  of  names  are  often  confused  and  inconsistent. 
Many  of  the  J  passages  in  these  chapters  occur  in  Judges  i. 

xiii.,  P;  except  i  =  JE,  13  =  J,  2-12  =  R°,  Territories  of  the 
Eastern  Tribes. 

xiv.,  1-5,  P,  Introduction  to  account  of  the  Territories  of 
the  Western  Tribes. 

xiv.  6-15  R°,  Hebron  given  to  Caleb. 

Sometimes  ascribed  to  JE.  The  discrepancy  with  xi.  21  probably 
indicates,  at  any  rate,  a  JE  basis. 

XV.,  P;  except  14-19,  63  =  J,  Territory  of  Judah. 

xvi.  f.,  P;  except  xvi.  iff.^  9,  xvii.  i^,  2*,  8,  9'*^  =  JE; 
xvi.  10,  ocvii.  11-18  =  J,  Territories  of  Ephraim  and  Western 
Manasseh. 

xviii.  i-io,  JE;  except  i  =  P;  3,*  7  =  R'',  Introduction  to 
the  account  of  the  Territories  of  the  Remaining  Seven 
Tribes. 

xviii.  11-28,  P;  except  iib  =  JE,  Territory  of  Benjamin. 

xix.-xxi.,   P;    except  xxi.   4i^  =  R°;    xlx.    9  =  JE;    xtx. 

47  =  J  i    ^^X'    49/  =  E,    Territories    of   Simeon,    Zebulun, 

Issachar,  Asher,  Naphtali,  Dan  and  Joshua ;  Cities  of  Refuge ; 

Levitical  Cities. 

In  XX.  vv.  4ff.  and  6b,  which  are  omitted  by  the  LXX.,  are  a  very 
late  addition  to  the  text,  modelled  on  Deuteronomic  passages  afler  the 
manner  of  similar  sections  of  Chronicles. 

xxii.,  R***;  except  i-8  =  R'',  Return  of  Reuben,  Gad  and 

Eastern  Manasseh  to  the  East  of  Jordan,  Erection  of  an 

Altar  in  Gilead  by  Reuben  and  Gad. 

Verses  9-30,  in  their  present  form,  were  compiled  by  a  late  priestly 
writer,  like  Judges  xxi.  Cf.  on  Numbers  xxxii.  There  was  an  older 
basis,  probably  JE,  for  this  section ;  but  the  compiler  has  dealt  with  it  so 
freely  that  the  original  narrative  cannot  be  reconstructed.  "  Half  Man- 
asseh "  here,  as  in  Numbers  xxxii,  is  an  editorial  addition. 


82  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

xxiii.,  R°,  Farewell  Speech  of  Joshua. 

xxiv.,  E;  except  ii^,  13,  31,  and  a  feiu  phrases  =^'^ \  26a, 
33  =  R^  Farewell  Speech  of  Joshua. 

Verse  33  is  generally  given  to  E,  cf.  on  Deuteronomy  x.  6. 

(e)  Use  in  N.T. — There  are  references  to  the  history, 
especially  Rahab  and  the  Fall  of  Jericho.  Cf,  also  i.  5,  with 
Hebrews  xiii.  5. 

29.  Judges. 

(a)  Title. — Hebrew  shophetim-,  rendered  by  LXX.  Kritai\ 
by  Vulg.  Liber  Jiidicuin  or  Judicuvi ;  by  EV.  Judges.  This 
title  was  given  because  the  narratives  are  chiefly  concerned 
with  the  "Judges"  or  rulers  in  Israel,  before  the  kings. 

(b)  Analysis. — The  framework  of  the  book  is  due  to 
Deuteronomic  editors,  so  that  it  once  existed  in  a  Deut- 
eronomic  edition,  to  which  priestly  writers  made  further 
additions.  The  Deuteronomic  work  made  use  of  earlier 
material,  which  is  often  supposed  to  have  been  a  section  of 
JE,  compiled  from  J  and  E.^  In  order  to  recognise  the 
doubt  which  still  remains  as  to  the  identification  of  this 
matter  with  JE,  it  is  denoted  in  the  sketch  of  contents  by 

(JE). 

On  the  understanding  that  the  identification  of  the  sources 
and  early  edition  of  Judges  with  J,  E,  and  JE  is  probable 
rather  than  certain,  the  history  of  the  composition  of  the 
book  may  be  summarised  as  follows  ^ : — 

During  the  monarchy,  c.  850-700,  two  independent  writers 
(J)  and  (E),  made  collections  of  the  narratives  concerning  the 
Judges.  Both  contained  accounts  of  Ehud,  Gideon  and 
Abimelech,  Jephthah,  the  Migration  of  the  Danites,  and  the 
Outrage  at  Gibeah.  One  narrative  (?  J)  contained  also  a 
narrative  of  the  war  with  the  Jabin,  and  the  story  of  Samson ; 
the  other  narrative  (?  E)  contained  also  the  stories  of  De- 
borah and  Barak,  and  of  Samuel.  These  were  combined  into 
a  pre-Deuteronomic  Book  of  Judges  (JE),  about  650.     (JE) 

*  BuDDE,  Moore.  ^  Substantially  as  Budde, 


JUDGES  83 

may  have  included  the  accounts  of  the  "Minor  Judges," 
Tola,  Jair,  Ibzan,  Elon,  Abdon,  from  (J)  or  (E)  or  else- 
where. During  the  Exile  (JE)  was  edited  by  a  Deuteronomic^ 
editor,  R°,  who  added  a  system  of  chronology,  and  the  story 
of  Othniel,  and  interpreted  the  book  so  as  to  illustrate  the 
Deuteronomic  doctrine  of  the  connection  between  national 
righteousness  and  national  prosperity.  He  omitted  J's  history 
of  the  Conquest,  i.  i-ii.  5,  the  story  of  Abimelech,  ix.,  the 
Death  of  Samson,  xvi.,  the  Migration  of  the  Danites,  and  the 
Outrage  at  Gibeah,  xvii.-xxi.,  as  unsuitable  to  his  purpose. 
R^'s  Judges  may  have  extended  to  i  Samuel  xii. ;  but  on  the 
other  hand,  both  JE  and  JED  may  have  been  continuous 
works  from  the  Creation  to  the  end  of  their  narrative.  If  so, 
we  can  scarcely  speak  of  pre-Deuteronomic  and  Deuteronomic 
Books  of  Judges,  they  were  merely  yet  unseparated  portions 
of  the  continuous  works. 

(JE)  continued  to  exist  after  the  compilation  of  the  Deuter- 
onomic Judges,  and  a  post-exilic  ^  editor,  R^,  restored  the 
portions  omitted  by  R°,  editing  them  after  his  own  fashion. 
The  ground  for  supposing  that  these  sections  were  omitted 
by  R"^  is  that  they  bear  no  traces  of  Deuteronomic  style,  and 
do  not  fit  into  the  Deuteronomic  framework.  The  accounts 
of  the  Minor  Judges  may  have  been  added  by  R^ 

(c)  Chronology  and  History. — The  preponderance  in  the 
dates  of  Judges,  and  of  the  history  of  Moses  and  Samuel  of 
the  number  "forty"  and  its  multiples  and  fractions,  shows 
that  the  system  of  chronology  has  been  constructed  on  the 
basis  of  reckoning  forty  years  to  a  generation.  Probably  this 
chronology  is  due  to  the  author  who  states  that  480  years 
elapsed  between  the  Exodus  and  the  building  of  Solomon's 
Temple;  the  period  was  made  up  of  twelve  generations  of 
forty  years  each.  We  have  thus  to  consider  the  chronology  of 
Judges  in  connection  with  that  of  the  whole  period  of  480 
years.     The  data  may  be  arranged  as  follows : — 


*  Not  necessarily  the  same  as  R^  in  the  Ilexateuch  and  elsewhere. 
2  Not  the  RP  of  tjie  Pentateuch. 


84 


BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 


(i)  Periods  outside  the  Book  of  Judges. 


Moses  . 

40 

Joshua. 

X 

*        ♦ 

* 

Eli       . 

40  (Heb.)  20  (LXX.) 

Samuel 

y 

Saul     . 

z 

David  . 

40 

Solomon  ^     . 

4 

124  +  x  +  y  +  z 

or 

i04  +  x  +  y+2 

(ii)  The  Greater  Judges, 

Othniel 

.     40 

Ehud 

.     80 

Barak 

.     40 

Gideon 

.     40 

Jephthah     . 

.       62 

Samson 

.     20 

^^8 

(iii)  The  Periods  of  Oppression. 

Cushan-rishathaim 

.       8 

Eglon 

.   18 

Jabin 

.     20 

Midianites  . 

.       7 

Ammonites. 

.     18 

71 

The  40  years  oppression  of  the  Philistines,  xiii.  i,  is  clearly  synchronous 
with  the  20  years  of  Samson  -f-  the  20  years  (LXX.)  of  Eli,  and  is  there- 
fore not  to  be  reckoned. 


(iv)  Minor  Judges. 

Tola 

.     23 

Jair 

.     22 

Ibzan 

•       7 

Elon 

.     10 

Abdon 

.       8 

^ 

70 

If  Abimelech's  3  years  be  added  we  get  73  years. 


*  Before  Building  of  Temple. 
8  LXX.,  Vat.,  etc.,  60. 


'  Or  without  Jephthah,  220. 


JUDGES  85 

The  sum  of  i.-iv.  is  534  +  x  +  y  +  z  if  the  Philistine 
oppression  and  the  reigns  of  Abimelech  and  Saul  are  in- 
cluded, and  if  forty  years  (Hebrew  Text)  are  given  to  Eli. 
But  the  Philistine  oppression  should  be  omitted ;  ^  Abimelech 
and  Saul  were  probably  left  out  of  the  reckoning  as  illegiti- 
mate, and  the  synchronism  of  the  Philistine  oppression  with 
Samuel  and  Eli  requires  us  to  accept  the  LXX.  number 
20  for  Eli.  Thus  the  whole  period  from  the  Exodus  to 
the  Temple  works  out  at  471+x  +  y.  As  x  +  y,  the  head- 
ships of  Joshua  and  Samuel  must  have  occupied  much 
more  than  nine  years,  this  result  is  strikingly  at  variance 
with  the  480  years  of  Kings.  The  easiest  solution  is  to  allow 
Joshua  and  Samuel  the  usual  40  years  each,  and  to  suppose 
that  R^  omitted  (iii.)  from  his  reckoning  on  the  assumption 
that  the  judgeships  were  continuous.  Thus  we  get 
47i+x-f-y-7i=47i+4o  +  4o-7i  =  48o, 
and  the  R°  chronology  of  Judges  agrees  with  the  R°  period  in 
Kings. 

Either  then  we  may  omit  the  Minor  Judges  as  outside  of 
the  original  scheme  of  chronology,  and  added  by  R^  to  supply 
Judges  for  the  interregna  of  the  oppressions,^  on  the  theory 
that  as  soon  as  one  judge  died,  he  was  always  immediately 
succeeded  by  another.  Or  we  may  omit  the  oppressions, 
and  suppose  that  each  oppression  was  reckoned  to  the  reign 
of  the  following  judge.  On  the  former  theory,  the  twelve 
generations  are  Moses,  Joshua,  Othniel,  Ehud,  Barak,  Gideon, 
Jephthah,  Samson,  Eli,  Samuel,  David,  Solomon. 

The  date  of  the  building  of  the  Temple  is  about  1040, 
which,  according  to  R'',  gives  us  1520  for  the  Exodus, 
apparently  much  too  early;  <^  §  28  (b). 

(d)  Greek  Versions.— 'Y\i^x&  are  two  separate  ^  versions, 
one  represented  by  most  of  the  uncials,  the  other  by  various 
cursives,  etc.,  and  by  Lucian's  recension. 

*  See  above. 

"  The  discrepancy  of  a  year  will  be  due  to  some  error  in  the  transmission 
of  the  text. 

*  Apart  from  Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion. 


S6  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(e)  Contents, — i.  i-ii.  5,  J;  except  laa  4,  8/,  18,  u.  1-5 
=  R^  Conquest  of  Canaan. 

Not  a  sequel  to  the  Book  of  Joshua,  but  a  parallel  account,  much 
of  which  has  already  been  given  in  that  book.  Verses  11-15,  21,^ 
27  f.,  29,  34= Joshua  XV.  14-19,  63,  xvii.  11  ff.,  xvi.  10,  xix.  47 
(LXX.).  Either  J  gave  no  account  of  Joshua  or  of  the  combined 
action  of  all  Israel,  and  only  narrated  the  conquests  of  single  tribes 
or  of  groups  of  tribes ;  or  J  narrated  the  doings  of  Joshua  and  united 
Israel  up  to  the  battle  of  Beth-horon,  and  then,  as  here,  the  conquests 
of  single  tribes,  etc.  Possibly  the  editor  who  prefixed  "After  the  death 
of  Joshua  "  has  removed  Joshua's  name  from  the  paragraph  on  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh. 

This  is  one  of  the  sections  supposed  to  have  been  included  in  (JE), 
removed  by  R°  and  replaced  by  R''- 

II.  6-XV.  Deuteronomic  Book  of  Judges. 

ii.  6-iii.  6,  R°  on  a  basis  of  E,  with  additions  by  R^  In- 
troduction, explaining  that  the  Israelites  suffered  defeat  and 
oppression  because  they  worshipped  "other  gods,"  but  were 
delivered  by  judges  because  Jehovah  had  compassion  on  their 
misery. 

iii.  7-1 1,  R°,  Othniel  delivers  from  Cushan-rishathaim. 

iii.  12-30  (JE);  except  12-15^,  3o  =  R°,  Ehud  delivers  from 
Eglon. 

iii.  31,  R^,  Shamgar  ben-Anath  kills  600  Philistines. 

The  absence  of  R^  formulae  shows  that  this  was  not  in  R'^'s  Judges. 
Shamgar  is  ignored  in  iv.  i.  The  name  was  obtained  from  v.  6,  the  Song 
of  Deborah,  and  was  perhaps  inserted  to  make  up  twelve  judges,  after 
excluding  Abimelech. 

iv.  f.  (JE) ;  including  an  ancient  poem^  the  Song  of  Deborah^ 
V.  2-3 1  a,  and  additions  of  R°,  viz.^  iv.  iff.,  23/,  v.  31^; 
and  R^  m.,  v.  i,  Deborah  and  Barak  deliver  from  Jabin  and 
Sisera. 

The  Song  is  almost  universally  accepted  as  a  contemporary  poem, 
possibly  by  Deborah  herself  The  absence  of  any  traces  of  Deuteronomic 
revision,  and  the  presence  of  some  words  and  idioms  apparently  character- 
istic of  post-exilic  Hebrew,  suggest  that  this  poem  was  not  included  either 
in  QE)  or  the  Deuteronomic  Judges,  but  was  preserved  either  inde- 
pendently or  in  some  collection  of  poems,  and  was  inserted  here  by 
RP  after  a  revision  necessitated  by  the  fact  that  many  words  and  idioms 
had  become  obsolete.  Owing  to  the  joint  eft'ect  of  the  extreme  antiquity 
of  the  poem  and  of  the  attempt  at  revision,  parts  of  it  are  unintelligible, 
e.g.^  14a.  This  Song  is  often  considered  to  be  the  oldest  extant  piece  of 
Hebrew  literature,  e.g.,  Nowack. 

^  KS  has  substituted  Benjamites  for  Judahites, 


RUTH  87 

vi.  ff.   (JE);  except  vi.   1-7,  viii.   27/^,  28,  33/!  =  R°    and 

editorial  additions  by  R^,  Gideon  delivers  from  the  Midianites. 

Two  stories  are  combined :  in  one  (J  ?),  Gideon  is  instructed  by  the 
Angel  of  Jehovah,  the  princes  of  Midian  are  Zebah  and  Zalmunna, 
and  Gideon  sets  up  an  ephod-idol  at  Ophrah ;  in  the  other  (E  ?), 
Jehovah  speaks  to  him  in  the  night,  i.e.^  in  a  dream,  he  destroys  the 
altar  of  Baal  and  the  Asherah,  and  the  princes  of  Midian  are  Oreb 
and  Zeeb. 

ix.  (JE) ;  omitted  by  R^,  restored  by  R^y  Abimelech. 
*  X.  1-5,  Either  (JE),  omitted  by  R^^  restored  by  R^;  or  first 
added  by  R^,  Two  "  Minor  Judges,"  Tola  and  Jair. 

X.  6-xii.   7   (JE);  except  x.  6-16/  xii.  T  =  R^y  Jephthah 

delivers  from  the  Ammonites. 

The  account  of  Jephthah's  negotiations  with  the  king  of  the  Ammonites, 
xi.  12-28,  does  not  belong  to  (J)  or  (E),  but  to  one  of  the  editors,  perhaps 

xii.  8-15,  Same  source  as  x.  1-5,  Three  "Minor  Judges," 
Ibzan,  Elon,  and  Abdon. 

xiii.  ff.  (J);  except  xiii.  i,  xv.  2o  =  R°,  and  editorial  addi- 
tions of  R^,  Samson  and  the  Philistines. 

xvi.-xxi.,  Sections  of  (JE),  Omitted  by  R°,  Restored 
AND  Edited  by  R^ 

xvi.  (J),  Samson  and  Delilah,  His  Captivity  and  Death. 

xvii.  f.  (JE),  Micah's  Idols,  Migration  of  the  Danites. 

xix.  (JE),  Outrage  at  Gibeah. 

XX.  f.,  R^  on  basis  of  JE^  War  of  the  other  Tribes  against 

Benjamin  to  punish  the  Outrage.     Wives  provided  for  the 

surviving  Benjamites. 

These  chapters  are  compiled  from  the  older  story  in  the  same  fashion  as 
Joshua  xxii.,  perhaps  by  the  same  hand. 

(f)  Use  in  N.  T. — There  are  three  or  four  references  to  the 
history. 

30.  Ruth. 

(a)  Authorships  Date,  and  Object. — The  author's  name  is 
entirely  unknown.  The  indications  of  time  are  conflicting. 
The  post-exilic  origin  of  the  genealogy,  iv.  8-22,  is  shown  by 
its  use  of  some  of  the  formulae  of  the  Priestly  Code;  but,  as 


88  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

these  verses  are  a  later  addition,^  this  does  not  show  that  the 
rest  of  the  book — to  which  we  may  now  confine  ourselves — is 
post-exilic. 

The  language  has  points  of  contact  with  the  pre-exilic 
literature,^  but  also  with  post-exilic  books ;  moreover,  there 
are  Aramaisms. 

The  customs  connected  with  the  marriage  of  a  Goel^  with 
his  kinsman's  widow  are  spoken  of  as  obsolete*;  and  differ 
from  those  prescribed  in  Deuteronomy  xxv.  5-10. 

The  mention  of  David  in  iv.  17,  shows  that  it  is  not  earlier 
than  his  reign. 

The  book  is  not  included  in  the  historical  books,  or  first 
section  of  the  "  Prophets "  in  the  Hebrew  Canon,  but  is 
placed  amongst  the  "  Hagiographa,"  as  one  of  a  group  of  Five 
Megilloth  or  Rolls. 

Upon  these  facts  the  following  conflicting  views  have  been 
based : — 

(i.)  The  book  was  written  before  the  Exile  out  of  interest  in 
the  family  history  of  David,  and  perhaps  also  to  inculcate 
marriage  with  a  kinsman's  widow.^  The  Aramaisms  are  due 
to  use  of  dialect,  except  in  iv.  7,  which  is  a  gloss.  This  view 
removes  the  statement  that  the  custom  was  obsolete.  The 
differences  from  Deuteronomy  ^^  show  that  the  latter  was  not  in 
existence,  and  that  therefore  our  book  is  earlier  than  B.C.  621. 
As  LXX.  places  Ruth  after  Judges,  it  is  suggested — not  very 
plausibly — that  Ruth  was  originally  an  appendix  to  Judges, 
and  was  afterwards  removed  into  the  Hagiographa. 

(ii.)  The  book  is  a  post-exilic  work  based  on  a  pre-exilic 
narrative.'^    This  view  would  explain  the  mixture  of  styles. 

(iii.)  The  book  is  a  post-exilic  work,  written  as  a  protest 

*  Bertholet,  Driver,  etc.,  etc. 

^  The  early  portions  of  Samuel,  Kings,  etc. 
'  R. v.,  "near kinsman.'* 

*  "  This  was  the  custom  in  former  time  in  Israel,"  iv.  7. 
^  Driver. 

*  Cf.  also  Deuteronomy  xxiii.  3. 

'  KONIG. 


SAMUEL  89 

against  the  prohibition  of  mixed  marriages  by  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah.^  The  classical  vocabulary  and  idioms  are  due  to  the 
author's  familiarity  with  Samuel,  Kings,  etc.,  whose  style  and 
spirit  he  imitated;  but  the  Aramaisms,  etc,  betray  the  post- 
exilic  origin.  The  custom  of  marriage  with  a  near  kinsman 
was  obsolete ;  and  the  writer,  who  was  not  in  sympathy  with 
Deuteronomy,  describes  it  according  to  popular  recollection, 
and  not  in  terms  of  the  law  in  Deuteronomy.  The  position 
in  the  Hagiographa  points  to  a  post-exilic  origin. 

In  any  case  there  is,  doubtless,  a  historical  basis  2;  some 
connection  of  David  with  Moab  seems  indicated  by  his  com- 
mitting his  father  and  mother  to  the  protection  of  the  king  of 
Moab.^  Whenever  the  book  was  written,  the  author  would 
not  have  invented  a  Moabite  ancestress  for  David,  he  must 
have  had  the  authority  of  an  accepted  tradition.  David's 
genealogy  is  used  in  those  of  Christ. 

31.  Samuel. 

(a)  Title  and  Divisions. — Hebrew  and  R.V.,  Samuel \  LXX., 
/.  and  ii.  Kings ;  Vulg.  and  A. V.  combine  the  two  titles ;  all 
with  reference  to  the  contents.  Our  two  books  originally 
formed  a  single  book,  and  are  so  treated  in  the  closing 
Masoretic  note,  and  were  so  regarded  by  the  Jews  in  the  time 
of  Origen.  The  division  is  first  found  in  the  LXX.,  from 
which  it  passed  into  the  Vulg.  and  other  versions,  and  into 
the  printed  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Text.* 

(b)  Analysis  and  Composition, — Here,  again,  there  are  post- 
exilic  and  Deuteronomic  sections,  added  to  older  material 
from  various  sources.  Hence  there  were  pre-exilic,  exilic, 
and  post-exilic  editions  of   the  book.     The  Deuteronomic 

^  Bertholet;  Cheyne,  Origin  of  Psalter,  p.  306;  Cornill  ; 
Kautzsch,  Bibel;  Kayser-Marti,  p.  208;  Smend,  A.  T.  TheoL, 
p.  409;  NowACK,  etc.,  etc. 

2  Bertholet,  Konig,  Budde  {ap.  Cornill),  see  in  Ruth  a  section  of 
the  Midrash  used  by  the  Chronicler, 

'  I  Samuel  xxii.  3  f. 

*  Cornill,  Kirkpatrick,  Ginsburg,  43,  953. 


90  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

material  apparently  comes  from  the  same  school  as  the 
similar  sections  in  the  rest  of  Genesis-Kings,  and  may  be 
denoted  by  R°.  The  older  material  is  often  ^  referred  to  JE. 
The  R^  and  post-exilic  additions  do  not  form  a  continuous 
editing,  but  are  sections  added  to  an  older  work,  which  was 
left  substantially  unaltered ;  the  R°  material  is  comparatively 
small.  Thus  Samuel  is  substantially  pre-Deuteronomic,  and 
its  general  character  has  not  been  seriously  affected  by  the 
work  of  the  later  editors.  The  older  material  (JE)^  falls 
into  two  or  more  sources. 

Kittel^  analyses  the  older  material  into  five  sources,  E\  Je.^ 
a  history  of  David,  composed  in  Judah,  in  the  time  of 
Solomon  or  Rehoboam ;  Da.^  a.  later  history  of  David,  com- 
posed in  Judah,  in  the  tenth  or  ninth  century;  »S,  a  Judahite  or 
Benjamite  history  of  Saul,  perhaps  by  the  author  of  /e. ;  SSy 
an  Ephraimite  history  of  Samuel  and  Saul,  compiled  from 
various  sources  about  the  time  of  Hosea.  E  and  SS  corres- 
pond roughly  to  the  various  strata  of  E  in  Budde,  and  /<?., 
Da.^  and  S  to  the  various  strata  of  J.  Budde's  J'  in  Samuel 
seems  plainly  either  written  by,  or  from  the  testimony  of,  con- 
temporaries of  Saul  and  David,  i.e.j  not  much  later  than  the 
death  of  Solomon,  c.  930,  while  he  dates  J'  "prior  to  800." 
Either  J'  must  be  dated  about  a  century  earlier  than  usual, 
or  that  document  absorbed  earlier  documents. 

The  slight  character  of  the  R°  and  post-exilic  revisions  may 
be  explained  in  one  or  both  of  two  ways.  Either  the  older 
book  was  so  well  known  and  established  that  R°  did  not  ven- 
ture to  make  much  alteration ;  or  the  theories  of  the  history 
held  by  R°  and  the  priestly  editors  respectively,  did  not  seem 
to  them  to  require  any  extensive  editing  of  the  book. 

Probably  i  Samuel  i.-xii.   formed  part  of  the   (JE)  and 

*  Budde. 

^  Brackets  are  used,  as  in  Judges,  to  indicate  that  the  identification  of 
the  sources  with  J,  E,  and  JE  is  doubtful. 

^  In  Kautzsch,  Bibd ;  H.  P.  Smith,  International  Com.y  gives  a 
similar  analysis,  referring  most  of  Samuel  to  two  main  sources — SI  (early 
Monarchy),  Sm  (Exile  or  later),  whose  contents  are  roughly  those  of 
Budde's  J  and  E. 


SAMUEL  91 

R^  Books  of  Judges.  Samuel's  Farewell  Speech,  xii.,  was 
probably  E's  conclusion  of  the  history  of  Samuel,  corres- 
ponding to  the  Farewell  Speech,  Joshua  xxiv.,  with  which  E 
concludes  the  history  of  Joshua.  The  chronological  state- 
ments in  I.  iv.  18,  and  perhaps  also  in  vii.  2,  belong  to  the 
R°  system  of  dates.  In  the  sketch  of  contents,  both  Budde's^ 
and  Kittel's  analyses  are  given ;  omitting,  however,  many  details 
of  the  analysis. 

(c)  Contents. — First  Samuel. 

I-XIL,  Samuel,  Eli,  and  Saul. 

i.  (E'),  SS,  Samuel  born  and  given  to  Jehovah. 

The  ordinary  Hexateuch  symbols  J,  E,  etc.,  give  Budde's  analysis ; 
SS,  etc — for  the  meaning  of  which  see  above — give  Kittel's ;  where  only 
one  symbol,  etc. ,  is  given,  Budde  and  Kittel  agree. 

ii.  i-io,  Song  of  Hannah. 

According  to  Budde,  post-exilic  addition,  so  also  Cheyne,  Psalter^ 
p.  57,  "  probably  "  ;  Kittel,  addition  from  unknown  source ;  Comill  and 
Driver,  under  the  monarchy.  The  Song  is  not  appropriate  to  the  occasion, 
which  is  only  touched  upon  in  passing  and  in  most  general  terms  in  5b. 
Verse  10  implies  either  the  present  or  past  existence  of  the  kingdom.  In 
style  and  spirit  the  Song  has  much  in  common  with  psalms  often  regarded 
as  post-exilic.  It  is  a  national  lyric,  celebrating  some  national  deliver- 
ance. 

ii.  ii-iii.  (E^),  SS ;  except  that  ii.  27-36  in  both^  and  Hi. 
11-14  in  Budde  ='?J^,  Samuel  announces  the  Doom  of  Eli's 
Family,  on  account  of  the  Wickedness  of  his  Sons. 

iv.-vii.  I  (E^),  E;  except  iv.  lU P,  22,  vi.  15,  17,  i8«  =  R, 
Ark  lost  at  Ebenezer,  its  Wanderings  amongst  the  Philistines, 
its  Restoration  to  Israel. 

vii.  2-viii.  (E') ;  except  the  "20  years"  of  vii.  2  =  R°  ;  Kittel, 
vii.  2-17  =  R'°*,  ?;/«.  =  SS,  Repentance  of  Israel,  Victory  over 
the  Philistines  at  Ebenezer,  Request  for  a  King. 

ix.-x.  16  (J),  S,  Samuel  anoints  Saul. 

X.  17-27  (E^),  SS;  except  25-27  =  RJ^  {Budde\  R  {Kittel), 
Saul  chosen  by  lot. 

xi.  (J);  except  12  f.  =  R^^]  S,  except  i2-i5  =  R,  Saul's 
Victory  over  the  Ammonites. 

1  In  Dr.  Haupt's  Sacred  Books  of  the  Old  Testament. 


02  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

xii.  (E'),  with  small  additions  by  R^ ;  Kittel,  R"^,  Samuel's 
Farewell  Speech. 

XIIL-XXI.,  David,  Saul,  Samuel. 

xiii.  f.  (J),  S;  except  xiii  i,  R;  8-15  (J»),  R;  19-22  (J'), 
R ;  xiv.  47-5 1>  ^  \  also  52  is  R  in  Kittely  Victories  of  Saul 
and  Jonathan  over  the  Philistines,  etc. 

Either  we  have,  in  xiv.  47-51,  as  above,  a  conclusion  of  the  history  of 
Saul  by  RD,  who  regarded  his  legitimate  reign  as  concluded  at  this  point ; 
in  the  next  chapters  he  is  deposed  by  Samuel,  and  David  is  anointed  king. 
Or,  this  is  the  conclusion  of  the  history  as  given  in  one  of  the  ancient 
sources,  and  is  placed  here  by  R^. 

XV.  (EO;  except  24-31,  34 /  =  (-^'),  SS,  Saul  rejected  for 
sparing  the  Amalekite  King, 

xvi.  I- 1 3,  Post-exilic  Editor^  Samuel  anoints  David. 

xvi.  14-23  (J),  Da.,  David  as  Saul's  Harper  and  Armour- 
bearer. 

xvii.-xviii.  5  (E');  except  xviu  12,  it^^  post-exilic^  xviii.  5  =  Jj 
SS,  except  12a,  15  =  R,  David  and  Goliath. 

LXX.  B,  etc.,  omit  xvii.  12-31,  38b,  41,  48b,  50,  5S-xviii.  5,  probably 
to  avoid  the  contradictions  arising  from  the  attempt  to  treat  this  and 
the  preceding  passage  as  parts  of  one  continuous  narrative.  The  alterna- 
tive advocated  by  Robertson  Smith,  Old  Testament,  etc.,  p.  121  ff.  and 
Cornill,  p.  loi,  H.  P.  Smith,  etc.,  that  these  passages  are  additions  to 
the  text,  introduced  from  some  lost  history  of  David,  seems  less  likely. 

xviii.  6-30  (J)j  except  6a a*,  bp,  12-19  =  (E');  'Da..,  except 
6f7a*  =  R,  12-19,  28-30  =  SS,  Saul's  Jealousy,  David  Saul's 
Son-in-law. 

LXX.  B,  etc.,  omit  17-19,  29b,  30  and  smaller  fragments;  cf.  above. 

xix.  (E*);  except  i8a/3-24,  post-exilic;  SS,  except  3,  18- 
24  =  i?,  Temporary  Reconciliation,  New  attempts  on  David's 
Life  by  Saul,  David  flees  to  Samuel. 

xx.-xxi.  I  (J)  j  except  4-17,  40-42  =  R^^;  Da.,  except  4-10, 
12-17=?,  40-42  =  R,  David's  Covenant  with  Jonathan. 

xxi.  2-10  (EO,  SS,  David  at  Nob. 

xxi.  11-16,  Budde, post-exilic ;  Kittel-},  David  at  Gath. 

xxii.-xxv.  (J);  except  xxii.  19,  xxiii.  i4b-i8  =  (E'),  xxii.  5, 
post-exilic,  xxiv.  2i-23«a,  xxv.  i  =  RJ^;  Da.,  except  xxii.  =  ^, 
xxiii,  6,  14-18,  xxv,  i  =  R,  David  at  Adullam,  Massacre  of 


SAMUEL  93 

the  Priests  at  Nob,  David  at  Keilah  and  Ziph,  spares  Saul 
at  Engedi,  Nabal. 

xxvi.  (E'),  SS,  David  spares  Saul  in  the  Wilderness  of 
Ziph. 

xxvii.-xxxi.  (J);  except  xxviii.  3  =  R°,  xxviii.  i6^-  =  R^^; 
Da.,  except  xxviii.  3,  17/ =  R,  David  tributary  to  Achish, 
Philistine  Campaign  against  Saul,  Saul  and  the  Witch  of 
Endor,  David's  Feud  with  the  Amalekites,  Defeat  and  Death 
of  Saul. 

xxviii.  3-25  should  come  after  xxx. 

Second  Samuel. 

I.-VIIL,  David's  Reign. 

i.-iv.  (J)j  except  i.  6- 11,  13-16  =  (E'),  //.  lort,  ii=R°;  Da., 

except  \.  6-16  =  SS,  /.  5,  ii.  loa,  11,  //V.  30,  w.  4  =  R,  it.  13-16, 

tit.  2-5  =  ?,  Lament  over  Saul  and  Jonathan,  David  reigns  at 

Hebron,  Ishbaal  at  Mahanaim,  Civil  War  between  them,  Abner 

and  Ishbaal  murdered. 

The  Lament  is  generally  ascribed  to  David.  On  the  Book  of  Jashar 
see  §  (28^),  Ishbosheth  is  a  corruption  of  the  more  accurate  Ishbaal,  E.V. 
Eshbaal,  preserved  in  i  Chronicles  viii.  33,  ix.  39 ;  cf.  Mephibosheth,  ix. 

v.  (J);  except  4/ =  R°;  Da.,  except  3,  6-16  =  Je.,  4f.  =  R, 

David  King  over  All  Israel,  Capture  of  Jerusalem,  Alliance 

with  Hiram,  Victories  over  the  Phihstines. 

According  to  Budde,  numerous  passages  in  i.-viii.,  xxi.-xxiv.  have 
been  transposed  from  their  original  position, 

vi.  (J),  Je.,  Ark  brought  to  Zion. 

vii.  (E') ;  R°  on  basis  of  Je.,  David  forbidden  to  build  the 
Temple,  but  promised  a  Permanent  Dynasty. 

viii.  (J)j  except  1-7  =  R°;  ii/  =  R^;  Kittel,  R  (?),  David's 

Victories  over  Moab,  Syria,  and  Edom. 

Verses  I4b-i8  are  evidently  the  conclusion  of  a  history  of  David's 
reign.  Cornill  suggests  that  they  were  composed  to  replace  ix.-xx.  by 
an  editor  who  considered  the  latter  chapters  damaging  to  David's  reputa- 
tion. It  may,  however,  be  the  conclusion  of  one  of  the  older  narratives  of 
the  reign  of  David. 

IX.-XX.,  David's  Court  and  Family  History. 
Budde  (J);  except  xiu  7/,  io^  =  R°,  xiv.  25^,  xv.  24,* 
^^Levites^^  and  ^^ Covenant "  xx.  23-26,  post-exilic  glosses. 


94  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Kittel^    Je. ;   except  xii.    10  ff,^    xv.    24,*    ^^  La>ites^^    and 

"  Covenant "  =  R  or  glosses. 

ix.,  Meribbaal  and  Ziba. 

Mephibosheth  is  a  correction  for  the  more  accurate  Meribbaal,  preserved 
in  I  Chronicles  viii.  34,  ix.  40 ;  ^  on  Ishbaal,  i.-iv. 

X.  ff.,  War  with  Ammon  and  Syria ;  Uriah,  Bathsheba. 

xiii.-xix.,  Absalom,  Tamar  and  Amnon,  Exile  and  Return, 
Revolt,  Defeat  and  Death,  David's  Return,  Meribbaal  and 
Ziba. 

XX.,  Sheba's  Revolt. 

In  XX.  23-26  we  have  the  formal  close  to  this  account  of  David's 
reign. 

XXI.-XXIV.,  Appendices. 

xxi.   1-14  (J);  except  in  2/  the  words  between  ^^ said  unto 

them''  and  ''what  shall  I  do'' =  'R}^ ;  Kittel=?,  H  in  2/  as 

above.     To  avert  the   famine  caused   by  Saul's   attempt  to 

massacre  the  Gibeonites,   seven  of   Saul's  descendants  are 

handed  over  to  the  Gibeonites,  who  hang  them. 

This  incident,  no  doubt,  took  place  at  the  beginning  of  David's  reign. 
Budde  transposes  the  section,  and  places  it  before  the  first  Meribbaal 
narrative,  viii.,  to  which  it  would  form  a  suitable  introduction. 

xxi.  15-22  (J),  Da.,  Feats  of  David's  Heroes  against  the 

Philistines,  Elhanan  kills  Goliath  of  Gath. 

Budde  places  this  section  after  v.  25.  It  is  in  apparent  contradiction 
with  the  narrative  of  David  and  Goliath  (E'),  SS.  The  text  of  verse  19  is 
corrupt,  but  the  reading  of  i  Chronicles  xx.  5,  "  the  brother  of  Goliath," 
seems  an  obvious  correction.^  Kittel,  Budde,  etc.  read  "Elhanan  ben-Jair 
the  Bethlemite." 

xxii.,    Budde^    late  post-exilic  addition;    Kittel  =},    i  =  R; 

Psalm  xviii. 

Probably,  like  most  of  the  poems  in  the  historical  books,  inserted  from 
a  collection  of  poems ;  in  this  case,  either  from  the  Psalter,  or  from 
one  of  the  earlier  collections  which  were  incorporated  in  the  Psalter. 
The  heading  is  the  same  as  in  the  Psalter.  The  differences  between 
this  chapter  and  the  Psalm  are  textual,  not  editorial,  and  are  similar 
in  character  and  extent  to  those  found  between  the  texts  of  a  chapter 
of  the  Greek  text,  in  two  MSS.,  belonging  to  quite  dififerent  groups.  The 
section  xxii.  i-xxiii.  7  interrupts  the  connection. 

^  Imitated  here  by  A.V.,  one  of  the  places  where  the  anxiety  of  A.V. 
to  harmonise  inconsistent  passages  overcomes  its  usual  deference  to  the 
Masoretic  Text. 


KINGS  95 

xxiii.    1-7,  BuddCj  late  post-exilic  addition;  Kittel=}^   the 

heading  by  R,  Last  Words  of  David. 

A  poem  describing  the  character  and  blessedness  of  an  ideal  king,  and 
the  hateful  character  and  certain  doom  of  the  wicked.  Budde's  and  Kittel's 
view  is  that  of  Cornill,  p.  108.  Cheyne,  Psalter^  205  f.,  assigns  it  to  the 
Exile. 

xxiii.  8-39  (J),  Da.,  David's  Heroes  and  their  Feats. 

Placed  by  Budde  with  xxi.  15-22,  of  which  it  is  the  continuation,  after 
V.  25. 

xxiv.  (J);  Kittel=}i  Census  punished  by  Plague,  which  is 

stayed  by  sacrifice  on  the  site  of  the  future  Temple. 

Closely  connected  with  xxi.  I-14,  and  placed  by  Budde  between  viii. 
and  xxi.  i.  In  i.  Kings,  chaps,  i  f.  are  practically  the  conclusion  of  the 
Book  of  Samuel ;  cf.  thereon  in  Kings. 

(e)  Use  in  N.  7. — There  are  a  few  references  to  the  history ; 
among  them,  our  Lord's  appeal  (Matthew  xii.  3  ff.)  to 
Abimelech's  gift  of  the  shewbread  to  David,  I.  xxi.,  as  a 
justification  of  the  disciples  plucking  corn  on  the  Sabbath. 
The  promise  to  David's  dynasty,  IL  vii.  14,  "I  will  be  to 
him  a  father,  and  he  shall  be  to  me  a  son,"  is  applied  to 
Christ  (Hebrews  i.  5.) 

32.  Kings. 

(a)  Title  and  Divisions. — Hebrew  and  R.V.,  i.  and  ii. 
Kings ;  LXX.,  iii.  and  iv.  Kings ;  Vulg.  and  A.V.  combine 
both  forms  of  the  titles.  Originally  a  single  book;  the 
division  was  made  by  the  LXX.,  from  which  it  found  its  way 
into  the  other  versions  and  the  printed  editions  of  the 
Hebrew.^ 

(b)  Analysis  and  Composition. — Up  to  a  certain  point  Kings 
presents  the  same  phenomena  as  the  previous  books.  There 
are  obvious  traces  of  pre-Deuteronomic  sources,  of  Deuter- 
onomic  material,  and  of  later  post-exilic  additions ;  and  it  is 
clear  that  an  edition  of  Kings  was  included  in  the  great 
Deuteronomic  history  or  series  of  histories,  Genesis-Kings,  ^ 
compiled  during  or  soon  after  the  Exile. 

On  the  other  hand.  Kings  differs  in  important  respects  from 

*  GiNSBURG,  pp.  45,  953.  "  Ruth,  as  always,  excepted. 


96  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

the  preceding  books,  (i.)  The  Deuteronomic  material  is  much 
more  extensive  than  in  Samuel,  (ii.)  Whereas  in  Judges  and 
Samuel,  the  work  of  R°  was  confined  in  each  case  to  re- 
editing  a  pre-Deuteronomic  book,  possibly  a  section  of  JE ;  in 
Kings,  R°  had  no  such  earlier  edition  to  work  upon,  but  him- 
self compiled  the  book  from  various  sources,  (iii.)  J  and  E, 
if  present  in  Kings  at  all,^  supply  only  a  small  portion  of  the 
material ;  and  the  main  source  or  sources  are  a  work  or  works 
constantly  cited  as  "The  Book  of  the  Acts  of  Solomon," 
"The  Book  of  the  Chronicles^  of  the  Kings  of  Judah,"  and 
"The  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Israel." 

Our  book  is  clearly  later  than  the  release  of  Jehoiachin, 
561 8;  but  probably  not  much  later,  for  this  section  is  the 
conclusion  of  the  author's  work,  there  is  nothing  extant  which 
can  be  a  sequel  by  the  same  hand;  the  insertion  of  this 
section  shows  the  author's  anxiety  to  bring  his  work  up  to 
date,  and  seems  to  be  the  last  important  event  known  to  him 
when  he  wrote.  On  these  and  other  grounds,  the  extant 
edition  of  Kings  may  be  assigned  to  the  second  half  of  the 
Exile,*  or  to  a  date  soon  after  the  Exile. 

But  the  work  of  the  exilic  or  post-exilic  Deuteronomist  to 
whom  we  owe  Kings,  was  merely  that  of  an  editor,  who 
brought  an  earlier  R°  book  up  to  date,  and  co-ordinated  it 
with  the  Deuteronomic  editions  of  Genesis-Kings.  Apart 
from  xxiii.  26 — xxv.  30,  which  were  added  by  the  later 
Deuteronomist,  the  rest  of  the  book,  in  substance,  was  the 
work  of  an  earlier  Deuteronomist,  writing  soon  after  621, 
possibly  towards  the  close  of  Josiah's  reign,  or  in  that  of 
Jehoiachin.  This  earlier  R'^,  the  real  author  of  Kings,  writes 
from  the  standpoint  of  the  Jewish  monarchy,  as  still  existing, 
and  existing  alone;  e.g.^  II.  xvii.  18,  21-23.^  So,  too,  the 
phrase  "unto  this  day"  is  used  in  R°  passages,  in  a  way  that 

1  Seeonl.  i.  f.,  II.  xx.  ff. 

'  Of  course,  not  our  "  Chronicles.'* 

8  II.  xxv.  27-30. 

*  Apart  from  insertions  by  post-exilic  editors,  see  on  I.  13,  etc.,  which 
did  not  substantially  alter  the  book. 

*  Verses  19  f.,  which  interrupt  the  connection,  are  a  later  insertion. 


KINGS  97 

shows  that  "  this  day  "  was  a  time  when  the  Jewish  monarchy 
still  existed.^ 

Amongst  other  material,  the  Deuteronomic  authors  furnished 
the  introductory  and  closing  formulae  to  the  various  reigns, 
including  the  judgment  on  the  character  of  the  kings ;  and  also 
a  series  of  references  to  the  sinful  toleration  of  the  high  places, 
obviously  written  from  the  standpoint  of  Deuteronomy.  The 
scheme  of  chronology  and  the  synchronisms  between  the 
reigns  of  Jewish  and  Israelite  kings  are  commonly  ascribed 
to  the  later  R°,  because  they  are  sometimes  at  variance  with 
the  history,  as  given  in  the  body  of  the  book,^  />.,  as  com- 
piled by  the  earlier  R^.  The  R°  authors  will  have  found 
their  data — the  lengths  of  the  reigns — in  the  older  sources. 

The  main  sources  used  by  R°  were  the  "  Books  "  referred  to 
above.  Those  dealing  with  Solomon  and  the  kings  of  Judah, 
or  even  all  three  "Books,"  may  be  sections  of  one  work. 
These  books  are  not  supposed  to  have  been  the  official  annals 
of  the  two  kingdoms,  but  compilations  from  those  annals. 
The  material  apparently  derived  from  the  "  Books "  had 
neither  the  dry  matter-of-fact  character  nor  the  cautious 
reserve  of  official  archives;  and  shows  a  special  interest  in 
ritual  and  the  Temple. ^  If  the  "Book"  on  Judah  was  used 
for  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  and  possibly  even  for  that  of 
Jehoiachin,*  it  must  have  been  compiled  in  Hezekiah's,  or 
even  in  Jehoiachin's  reign.  The  latter  seems  impossible,  it  is 
too  near  to  the  latest  possible  date  for  the  pre-exilic  R°,  and  is 
also  excluded  by  the  absence  of  traces  of  Deuteronomic  in- 
fluence from  the  material  supposed  to  be  derived  from  the 
"  Books."  Hezekiah's  reign  would  not  be  an  improbable  date 
for  the  "  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah,"  and 
if  the  other  two  "  Books  "  are  not  sections  or  variant  titles  for 
parts  of  the  same  work,  they  may  be  earlier;  but  as  they 

*  II.  viii.  22,  xvi.  6. 

»  CoRNiLL,  p.  ii6,  Wellhausen,  Composition  of  the  Hexatetich, 
p.  300. 

^  Unless  the  sections  dealing  with  the  latter  are  from  another  source. 
^  So  Kamphausen  in  Kautzscii,  Bibel. 

H 


98  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

seem  to  have  been  very  similar  in  character,  not  much  earlier. 
Early  documents,  J  or  an  early  history  of  David,  E,  ninth 
century  prophetic  narratives  of  Northern  Israel  are  also  dis- 
tinguished, and  apparently  were  not  parts  of  the  "  Books." 

If  the  "Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah"  is  referred  to 
the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  II.  xxiv.  5,  which  cites  it  for  Jehoiakim,  is 
either  a  mistaken  imitation  by  the  later  R^  of  the  formula  of  the 
earlier  R^,  or  the  "Book"  itself  was  supplemented  and  used  by  the 
exilic  R°.  One  is  tempted  to  suggest  that  the  "Acts"  and  the  two 
"  Books "  were  a  Deuteronomic  work  or  works  used  by  the  later  R°. 

Strictly  speaking,  our  book  does  not  state  that  the  "Acts"  and 
"Books"  are  the  authorities  for  its  statements,  but  refers  the  reader 
to  them  for  further  information ;  but,  doubtless,  as  is  generally  taken 
for  granted,  the  work  or  works  in  question  were  one  of  the  chief 
sources  used  by  the  author  of  Kings.  The  sections  of  Kings  derived 
from  the  "Books"  are  sometimes  spoken  of  as  the  "Epitome,"  and, 
of  course,  owe  their  present  form  to  the  selection  and  arrangement  made 
by  the  pre-exilic  R"^- 

(c)  Chronology. — The  duration  of  the  reigns  of  the  kings 
of  Israel  and  Judah  furnishes  two  sets  of  data  for  the 
chronology,  and  the  synchronisms  bring  the  two  into 
relation  with  each  other.  The  two  sets  of  data,  however, 
are  prima  facie  inconsistent,  e.g.^  the  period  from  the 
accession  of  Athaliah  and  Jehu  to  the  fall  of  Samaria 
is  165  years  according  to  the  Judahite  reigns,  but  143 
years  7  months  according  to  the  Israelite  reigns.  While, 
according  to  the  Assyrian  dates,  the  interval  must  have 
been  less  than  132  years.  By  a  free  use  of  co-regencies 
between  father  and  son,  and  of  other  uncertain  elements 
in  the  data — such  as  whether  the  year  of  a  king's  death 
counts  both  to  him  and  his  successors — these,  or  any,  dis- 
crepancies may  be  harmonised.  But  it  is  scarcely  worth 
while  to  take  the  trouble,  for  Kings  affords  further  evidence 
of  what  has  already  appeared  in  Judges,  namely,  that  the 
Deuteronomic  chronology  is  partly  controlled  by  a  priori 
theories.  I.  vi.  i  states  that  480  years  elapsed  from  the 
Exodus  to  the  building  of  the  Temple ;  the  Judahite  reigns, 
etc.  give  480  years  from  the  building  of  the  Temple  to  the 
Return  ;i  the  total  Israelite  reigns  amount  to  242  years,  which 

*  An  argument  for  the  post-exilic  date  of  the  later  R^- 


KINGS  99 

may  reasonably  be  corrected  to  240  years,  the  half  of  480. 
Evidently  sets  of  twelve  and  six  generations  of  forty  years 
each.  The  discrepancies  when  the  two  sets  of  data  are  closely 
compared  may  be  due  to  the  fact  that  one  or  other  of  the 
editors  overlooked  the  fact  that,  owing  to  the  adjustment  of 
the  figures  to  his  theory  of  six  and  twelve  generations,  his 
sum  would  not  "prove."  Nevertheless  for  Kings,  R°  pro- 
bably had  accurate  data,  and  has  not  seriously  departed  from 
them.^ 

(d)  Contents  and  Archczology, 

First  Kings. 

I.,  II.,  Conclusion  of  the  History  of  David,  Adonijah*s 

Conspiracy,  Solomon  Anointed,  Death  of  David,  Execution  of 

Adonijah,  Joab,  and  Shimei,  Banishment  of  Abiathar. 

With  the  exception  of  ii.  27,  a  later  addition,  and  ii.  i-ii,  which  has 
been  edited  by  R°,  chapters  i.,  ii.  are  the  conclusion  of  the  early  history  of 
David,  which  Budde  ascribes  to  J  ;  (/^  §  31. 

III.-XL,  Solomon. 

iii.,  Pharaoh's  Daughter,  Solomon's  Choice  and  Judgment. 

Pre-Deuteronomic ;  except  2/.,  14/.  =R^.  How  far  the  pre-Deuter- 
onomic  sections  in  iii.-xi.  come  from  the  Book  of  the  Acts  of  Solomon, 
xi.  41,  or  from  "prophetical  narratives,"  is  matter  of  controversy. 

iv.  1-14,  Solomon's  Ministers,  Splendour,  and  Wisdom. 

Substantially  pre-Deuteronomic. 

V.  is-ix.  9,  The  Temple — Treaty  with  Hiram  and  other 
Preparations,  its  Building.  Palaces,  Pillars,  Furniture,  etc. 
Jehovah  appears  again  to  Solomon. 

Pre-Deuteronomic  groundwork,  to  which  the  following  are  the  chief 
additions:  R°,  vi.  I  {later),  7,  11-13,  viii.  1-9,*  14-66,*  ix.  1-9;  late 
priestly  writers,  "the  Most  Holy  Place,"  in  vi.  16,  vii.  48-50,  viii.  laa, 
2aa,  6,  from  ^'  And  the  Tent  of  Meeting,'^  5,  *'the  Most  Holy  Place"  in  6. 
LXX.  omits  "the  Tent  of  Meeting,  and  all  the  holy  vessels  that  were 
in  the  Tent,"  in  v.  6 ;  its  reading  in  I2  probably  shows  that  the  original 
cited  this  verse  from  the  Book  of  Jashar^  cf.  on  Joshua  x.  I2  ;  Ixx.  places 
12  f.  after  53. 

ix.  lo-x.,  Cession  to  Hiram,  Acquisition  of  Gezer,  Corvee, 
Commerce,  Queen  of  Sheba,  Splendour  and  Power, 
Substantially  pre-Deuteronomic,  from  various  sources. 

*  Cf.  "  Chronology  "  in  Hastings'  Bible  Dictionary y  and  Wellhausen, 
Composition  of  Hexateuchj  p.  300,  Benzinger,  Kings ^  xviii.~xxl 


lOO  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

xi.,  Solomon's  Harem,  Worship  of  Strange  Gods,  Adver- 
saries and  Death. 

Deuteronomic ;  except  14-28,  40,  taken  from  one  of  the  older  sources. 

XII.-XVI.,  Jeroboam  to  Ahab. 

xii.  1-3 1.,  Division  into  Two  Kingdoms,  under  Rehoboam 
and  Jeroboam. 

Pre-Deuteronomic  j  except  26-29  =  ^^' 

xii.  32-xiii.,  Mission  of  Anonymous  Prophet  to  Jeroboam  at 
Bethel,  the  Prophet's  Disobedience  and  Death. 

Post-exilic  addition,  Benzinger,  etc. 

xiv.  1-20,  Abijah  pronounces  the  Doom  of  Jeroboam  and 
his  House,  Death  of  Jeroboam. 

Deuteronomic. 

xiv.  21-31,  Rehoboam,  Shishak. 

Pre-Deuteronomic ;  except  the  formulae.  Shishak,  c.  966-933,  in  his 
inscription  in  the  temple  of  Amon  at  Karnak  states  that  he  captured  cities 
both  in  Judah  and  Israel. 

XV.  f.,  Abijah,  Asa,  of  Judah ;  Nadab,  Baasha,  Elah,  Zimri, 
Omri,  Ahab,  of  Israel. 

Deuteronomic  epitome  from  the  "  Book  of  the  Chronicles  " ;  xvi.  2-4, 
perhaps  composed  by  R"^,  or  even  later. 

In  the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  Omri  is  mentioned  as  paying  tribute  to 
Asurnazirpal  in  876 ;  Israel  is  often  spoken  of  as  the  "  House  of  Omri"  ; 
Ahab  is  mentioned  in  a  list  of  Syrian  kings  whom  Shalmaneser  II.  claims 
to  have  defeated  at  Karkar  on  the  Orontes  in  854, 

On  the  Moabite  Stone,  Mesha,  King  of  Moab,  tells  how  Omri  oppressed 
Moab,  and  how,  under  him  (Mesha),  Moab,  by  the  grace  of  Chemosh,  re- 
covered its  independence,  and  captured  many  towns  from  Gad.  This 
narrative  is  the  sequel  to  ii.  Kings  iii.,  or  vice  versa. 

XVII. — Second  Kings.     XHI. — Elijah  and  Elisha. 

In  these  chapters,  the  bulk  of  the  narratives  concerning  Elijah  and 
Elisha  are  referred  to  ninth  century  prophetical  documents  of  the  Northern 
Kingdom,  denoted  below  by  El.  Other  long  and  graphic  accounts  of  the 
Wars  of  Israel  and  Syria,  and  the  overthrow  of  the  House  of  Omri,  are 
referred  to  another  northern  document,  perhaps  the  Hexateuchal  E.^ 

xvii.  ff..  El.,  Elijah — Famine,  Cherith,  Zarephath,  Victory 

over  Baal  at  Carmel,  Theophany  at  Horeb,  Calling  of  Elisha. 

XX.  (E),  Ahab's  Victories  over  Benhadad. 

The  account  of  the  anonymous  prophet,  13  f.,  22,  28,  35-43,  is  re- 
garded by  Wellhausen,  Benzinger,  and  Kamphausen  as  a  later  addition, 
according  to  the  latter,  post-exiUc. 

1  So  Kamphausen;  Benzinger,  xx.,  xxii.,  9th  cent.  hist,  of  Ahab. 


KINGS  loi 

xxi.,  El.  ;  except  20^-26  =  R°,  Naboth's  Vineyard, 
xxii.  1-38  (E),  Ahab  and  Jehoshaphat  at  Ramoth  Gilead, 
Micaiah's  Warning,  Death  of  Ahab. 
xxii.  39-54,  Jehoshaphat  of  Judah,  Ahaziah  of  Israel. 
Deuteronomic  epitome  from  the  "Books  of  the  Chronicles." 

Second  Kings. 

i.,  Ahaziah's  Sickness  and  Death,  Elijah  calls  down  Fire 
from  Heaven. 

Verses  i,  18,  belong  to  the  Deuteronomic  epitome  ;  2-17  are  held  to  be 
a  late  post-exilic  addition  on  an  earlier  basis;  Benzinger,  2-4,  I7a  = 
El.,  5-16  belong  to  time  of  earlier  R°. 

ii.,  El.,  Elijah's  Ascension,  Elisha  succeeds  him. 

This  chapter  and  the  succeeding  sections  of  El.,  dealing  with  Elisha, 
probably  belong  to  a  document,  different  from,  but  allied  to  the  document 
from  which  the  earlier  sections  dealing  with  Elijah,  were  taken. 

iii.  (E) ;  except  i  ff.  =  R°*,  War  of  Jehoram,  Jehoshaphat, 
and  the  King  of  Edom  against  Moab.     Cf,  on  I.  xv.f. 

iv.-vi.  23,  El.,  Elisha's  Miracles— Widow's  Oil,  Shunamitess, 
Death  in  the  Pot,  Feeding  a  Multitude,  Naaman,  Gehazi, 
Floating  Axe-head,  Syrian  Army  beguiled  into  Samaria  and 
released. 

vi.  24-vii.  (E),  Benhadad  besieges  Samaria,  Famine,  De- 
liverance foretold  by  Elisha,  Flight  of  the  Besiegers. 

viii.  1-15,  El.,  Elisha  commends  the  Shunamitess  to  the 
king,  and  anoints  Hazael. 

viii.  16-29,  Jehoram  and  Ahaziah  of  Judah. 

Deuteronomic  epitome. 

ix.  f.  (E);  except  tx.  'j-ioa,  14,  15^;,  29,  x,  28-31  =  R^;  .r. 
^2-^6  =  Deuteronomic  epitome^  Jehu  slays  Jehoram,  Ahaziah, 
and  Jezebel,  becomes  king,  and  massacres  the  family  of  Ahab 
and  the  worshippers  of  Baal,  Victories  of  Hazael,  Jehu's 
reign  and  death. 

From  the  Black  Obelisk  of  Shalmaneser  II.,  King  of  Assyria,  now  in 
the  British  Museum,  we  learn  that  Shalmaneser  defeated  Hazael  in  842, 
and  that  Jehu  sent  tribute  to  the  Assyrian  king,  which  is  depicted  on  it. 

xi.-xiii.  13,  Athaliah's  Usurpation,  Athaliah  slain  and  Joash 

of  Judah  crowned,  Reign  of  Joash,  Repair  of  the  Temple, 

Joash  of  Israel. 


I02  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Deuteronomic  compilation  from  '*  Books  of  the  Chronicles,"  and  per- 
haps other  older  sources,  e.g.y  in  xi,  i3-i8a.  The  identity  of  xiii.  12  f., 
with  xiv.  15  f.,  is  due  to  some  accident,  perhaps  connected  with  the 
successive  editings. 

xiii.  14-21,  El.;  22,  24  f.,*  Pre-Dmteronomic ;  23,  R°, 
Death  of  Elisha,  Hazael's  Victories  and  Death,  Victories  of 
Joash. 

XIV.-XXV.,  Closing  Period  of  the  Monarchy. 

xiv.  f.,  Amaziah  of  Judah,  Joash  of  Israel  defeats  Amaziah, 
Jeroboam  II.  of  Israel,  Azariah  (Uzziah)  of  Judah,  Zechariah, 
Shallum,  Menahem  of  Israel ;  Invasion  of  Pul,  King  of  Assyria, 
to  whom  Menahem  pays  tribute ;  Pekahiah  and  Pekah  of 
Israel ;  Tiglath-Pileser,  King  of  Assyria,  carries  captive  Galilee 
and  Gilead ;  Jotham  of  Judah. 

Deuteronomic  epitome,  in  which  xiv.  5  f.  and  the  framework,  etc.  of  the 
formulae  are  added  by  the  compiler. 

Pul  was  the  founder  of  a  new  Assyrian  dynasty,  who  assumed  the  title 
of  Tiglath-Pileser  III.,  745-727.  His  inscriptions  record  campaigns  in 
Phoenicia,  Syria  and  Palestine,  tribute  paid  by  Azariah  of  Judah,  Rezin  of 
Damascus,  Menahem  of  Samaria. 

xvi.  f.,  Ahaz  of  Judah,  Ahaz  attacked  by  Pekah  and  Rezin, 
purchases  the  aid  of  Tiglath-Pileser,  who  attacks  Damascus 
and  Israel ;  Hoshea  of  Israel,  Siege  of  Samaria  by  Shalmaneser 
IV.,  Fall  of  Samaria,  Captivity  of  Israel,  Settlement  of  Eastern 
Tribes  in  the  territory  of  Israel. 

Deuteronomic  epitome,  in  which  xvii.  7-41  is  an  epilogue  to  the  history 
of  Israel  by  the  Deuteronomic  editors. 

The  Assyrian  inscriptions  record  Tiglath-Pileser's  subjugation  of  Syria 
and  Israel,  the  deportation  of  Israelites  to  Assyria,  the  annexation  of  part 
of  the  territory  of  Israel,  the  murder  of  Pekah  by  his  subjects,  the  appoint- 
ment of  Hoshea  by  Tiglath-Pileser,  to  whom  his  nominee  paid  tribute, 
also  how  Sargon  II.,  722-705,  took  Samaria,  and  carried  the  Israelites 
away  captive  in  722. 

xviii.  fF.,  Hezekiah — Suppression  of  the  High  Places,  Fall  of 

Samaria,  Deliverance  from  Sennacherib,  Illness  and  Recovery, 

Embassy  of  Merodach  Baladan. 

Deuteronomic  compilation  from  older  sources,  in  which  xviii.  4^-7,  12, 
etc.  are  additions  of  the  editors.  The  prophecies,  xix.  21-28,  32-34,  are, 
according  to  Driver,  p.  187,  unquestionably  Isaiah's,  and,  if  so,  may  have 
been  borrowed  by  the  editor  from  an  early  collection  of  Isaiah's  writings. 
Cheyne  and  Duhm  deny  that  they  are  Isaiah's ;  if  so,  they  will  be  late 
additions  to  Kings.  The  section  xviii.  I'j-xx.  19  has  been  borrowed 
from  here,  with  some  abridgment  by  the  author  of  Isaiah  xxxvi-xxxix. 


THE   HISTORICAL  BOOKS  103 

The  events  in  xx.  1-19,  Illness,  Embassy,  took  place  before  those  of 
xviii.  f. 

An  inscription  of  Sennacherib  tells  how  he  defeated  the  Egyptians  at 
Eltekeh,  laid  waste  Judah,  carried  off  more  than  200,ocx)  captives  and 
much  spoil,  and  received  tribute  from  Hezekiah.  Naturally,  he  does  not 
mention  the  catastrophe  which  befell  his  army ;  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
he  does  not  claim  to  have  taken  Jerusalem.  The  Babylonian  Chronicle 
states  that  S.  was  assassinated  by  his  son. 

xxi.-xxiv.  5,  Manasseh,  Amon ;  Josiah — Repair  of  Temple, 

Discovery  of   the   Law,   Suppression   of   the    High   Places, 

Passover,   Defeat   by  Pharaoh   Necho  at   Megiddo,   Death. 

Jehoahaz,  Jehoiakim. 

For  the  most  part  a  free  composition  by  the  author  of  Kings,  i.e.y 
the  earlier  Deuteronomic  editor  who  had  access  to  contemporary  in- 
formation for  this  period.  The  "Book  of  the  Chronicle,"  however, 
is  still  cited  for  all  these  kings,  except  Jehoahaz,  so  that  some  use 
was  made  of  that  authority,  although  some  or  all  of  the  references  are 
the  work  of  a  later  editor.  The  speech  of  Iluldah,  xxii.  15-20,  is 
regarded  as  the  work  of  the  later  Deuteronomic  editor,  substituted  for 
a  parallel  section  in  the  first  edition  of  Kings ;  xxiii.  26/  is  from  the 
same  hand.  If  the  work  of  the  earlier  Deuteronomic  editor  concluded 
with  Josiah's  Reformation,  xxiii.  26-xxiv.  5  must  be  ascribed  to  the  later 
editor. 

xxiv.  6-xxv.,  Jehoiachin,  First  Captivity  of  Judah;  Zedekiah, 
Fall  of  Jerusalem,  Final  Captivity  of  Judah ;  Release  of 
Jehoiachin. 

Composed  by  the  later  Deuteronomic  editor.  The  editor  of  the  Book 
of  Jeremiah  has  borrowed,  with  slight  changes,  xxiv.  l8-A:jrf.  21,  xxv. 
27-y>=/eremiah  Hi.  1-27,  31-34.  Nebuchadnezzar's  numerous  inscrip- 
tions are  taken  up  with  his  buildings  and  offerings  in  Babylon,  and  do  not 
record  his  campaigns  in  Judah, 

(d)   Use  in  N.  T. — There  are  a  few  references  to  the  history, 

especially  to  Solomon,  Elijah,  and  Elisha. 

33.  Teaching  of  the  Historical  Books. 

(a)  History. — The  crucial  events  and  main  lines  of  the 
History  of  Israel — the  Exodus,  the  Conquest,  the  establishment, 
development,  and  fall  of  the  Monarchy— are  guaranteed  by  the 
internal  evidence  of  the  narratives,  and  from  the  time  of  Ahab,^ 
by  the  witness  of  the  monuments  and  by  secular  literature. 

^  Before  Ahab,  we  have  direct  evidence  from  the  monuments  as  to 
isolated  events,  and  constructive  evidence  bearing  on  the  history  generally ; 
but  from  the  renewal  of  the  Assyrian  advance  westward,  about  the  time  of 
Ahab,  we  have  a  fairly  continuous  Assyrian  and  Chaldean  history  running 
parallel  to,  and  on  the  whole  confirming  the  history  in  Kings. 


104  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

This  history  obviously  serves  for  warning  and  example ;  its 
lessons  are  mostly  pointed  out  by  the  prophets.  Also,  in  con- 
junction with  the  prophetical  writings,  our  books  record  the 
discipline  by  which  God  educated  Israel,  and  the  providential 
dealings  by  which  He  prepared  the  way  for  Christ. 

(b)  Symbolic  Narratives. — Some,  however,  of  the  narratives 
are  not  generally  accepted  as  literal  history.  Genealogies,  etc., 
especially  in  Genesis,  are  often  supposed  to  give  tribal  history 
and  state  tribal  relationships  in  terms  of  the  individual  and 
the  family.  If  this  is  the  case,  we  merely  lose  one  kind  of 
information  and  gain  another.  In  other  cases,  as  in  the 
chapters  on  the  Creation,  the  Fall,  the  Flood,  etc.,  the  narra- 
tive is  commonly  held  to  be  a  kind  of  parable  or  allegory, 
rather  than  actual  history.  Again,  when  we  recognise  that  we 
have  parables  and  not  history,  we  incur  no  loss  of  spiritual 
teaching ;  we  change  the  form  in  which  the  lessons  are  taught, 
and  perhaps  even  add  to  their  force  and  significance.  Some 
of  the  deepest  and  strongest  religious  experiences  express 
themselves,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  through  the  dramatic 
picturesqueness  of  parable  and  allegory.  It  was  so  with 
Christ.  In  many  ways,  neither  biography  nor  autobiography 
are  so  impressive  or  convincing  as  the  symbolic  narrative. 
The  latter  is  the  more  candid  and  faithful,  and  by  its  means 
the  seer  can  set  forth  the  truth  he  has  learnt  from  his  personal 
experience,  without  the  limitations  and  obscurities  of  a  personal 
narrative.  Much  of  the  gospel  is  set  forth  in  such  parables 
as  the  Prodigal  Son,  which  have  ever  been  mighty  to  convince 
and  save.  How  many  Church  histories,  how  many  biographies 
of  eminent  divines  would  we  not  gladly  sacrifice  rather  than 
lose  the  Pilgrim's  Progress!  The  great  revelations  which 
came  to  primitive  Israel  naturally  found  expression  in  such 
narratives.  They  may  not  be  literal  history,  but  they  none  the 
less  bear  true  witness  that,  in  those  far  off  days,  God  spoke  to 
man,  and  man  heard,  and,  in  some  measure,  understood. 

(c)  The  Selection  and  Transmission  of  the  Narratives. — Our 
narratives,  whether  historical  or  symbolical,  are  the  survivors 
of  a  much  more  numerous  company.    They  are  extant  through 


THE   HISTORICAL  BOOKS  105 

a  spiritual  survival  of  the  fittest,  as  the  conquerors  in  a 
spiritual  struggle  for  existence.  In  the  long  process  of  re- 
peated editings,  inspired  men  were  guided  to  choose  the  good 
and  reject  the  evil,  and  the  inspired  Church  within  the  nation 
was  guided  to  accept  and  canonise  the  results  of  their  labours. 
Thus  it  is  that  we  have  the  noble  and  simple  narratives  of  the 
Old  Testament  instead  of  the  immoral  and  grotesque  legends 
of  polytheism.  And  where  something  is  preserved  the  teach- 
ing of  which  was  not  accurate  in  the  light  of  a  fuller  revela- 
tion, the  editors  have  been  careful  to  place  some  better 
expressions  of  the  truth  in  the  same  context.  Thus  our 
narratives  not  only  set  forth,  historically  or  symbolically,  the 
experiences  of  the  man  or  generation  with  which  they  origi- 
nated, but  also  of  countless  subsequent  generations  who  re- 
iterated and  accepted  them.  They  stand  in  our  Bible, 
because  the  spiritual  truths  they  set  forth  have  been  recog- 
nised again  and  again  by  the  hearts  and  consciences  of  men. 
As  our  own  hearts  respond  to  them,  we  share  a  fellowship  of 
man  with  God,  which  began  when  these  stories  were  first  told, 
before  the  beginnings  of  history,  and  has  continued  ever 
since. 

(d)  The  Law. — In  many  respects  the  social  legislation  re- 
presents a  higher  ideal  than  any  Christian  state  or  Church  has 
ever  seriously  attempted  to  realise.  The  land  laws,  for  in- 
stance, seek  to  provide  every  Israelite  family  with  an  indepen- 
dent means  of  livelihood.  In  other  matters,  many  provisions 
which  are  not  according  to  present  Christian  standards,  never- 
theless marked  a  distinct  advance  in  justice  and  humanity. 
Thus  slavery  is  permitted,  but  each  successive  code  seeks  to 
improve  the  condition  of  slaves.  Similarly,  ritual  regulations, 
which  do  not  appeal  to  us,  suitably  expressed  the  religious 
feelings  of  their  times,  and  replaced  others  of  a  lower  order. 
Even  the  multiplicity  and  minuteness  of  the  Priestly  Code 
testify  to  a  profound  conviction  of  the  reality  of  the  relations 
between  Israel  and  Jehovah,  and  to  the  urgent  necessity  that 
the  nation  should  be  in  right  relations  to  its  God.  With 
certain  necessary  modifications,  we  may  apply  to  the  laws  of 


io6  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

the  Priestly  Code  what  Canon  Illingworth  says  of  ethnic  ritual. 
We  should  not  speak  of  the  Levitical  regulations  as  "  puerile," 
or  even  "human  enough,"  though  there  is  a  large  human 
element;  but  if  the  ethnic  rituals  witness  to  the  reality  of 
religion,  the  Pentateuchal  legislation  bears  more  forcible  and 
convincing  testimony.  The  passage  runs  as  follows : — "  The 
ritual  regulations  of  India,  Persia,  Babylon,  Egypt,  speak  foi 
themselves.  They  are  obviously  human  enough;  minute, 
excessive,  often  puerile.  Yet  there  is  something  behind 
them;  they  labour  to  formulate  something  other  than  them- 
selves, a  power,  an  order,  an  authority,  of  which  man  is 
vaguely,  but  really  conscious,  and  which  he  craves  to  have 
translated  into  words  that  he  can  understand.  We  turn  with 
impatience  from  the  endless  pages  of  the  religious  law-books 
of  the  world ;  but  their  very  mass  is  an  indication  of  the 
divine  superintendence  which  they  symbolise;  an  effort  to 
express  the  sense  of  infinite  obligation,  by  the  accumulation 
of  infinitesimal  rules."  ^ 

*  Personality^  pp.  169  f. 


CHAPTER  III. 

LATER  HISTORICAL  BOOKS 
CHRONICLES  TO  ESTHER 


1.  Titles,  Divisions,  and  Mutual 

Relations  of   Chron.-Ezra- 
Neh. 

2.  Date     and     Authorship     of 

Chron.  -Ezra-Neh. 

3.  Sources  of  Chron. 

4.  Contents  of  Chron. 


5.  Historical      Character      and 

Teaching  of  Chron. 

6.  Use  of  Chron.  in  N.T. 

7.  Sources  of  Ezra-Neh. 

8.  Hist.  Accuracy  of  Ezra-Neh. 

9.  Contents  of  Ezra-Neh. 
10.  Esther. 


I.  Titles,  Divisions,  and  Mutual  Belations  of  Chronicles- 
Ezra-Nehemiah. — Similarity  of  style  and  spirit,  the  identity 
of  the  end  of  Chronicles  with  the  beginning  of  Ezra,^  and 
the  fact  that  Chronicles  ends  in  the  middle  of  a  sentence,^ 
show  that  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah  once  formed  a 
single  work.  Our  English  versions  follow  the  Vulg.  and 
LXX.  in  placing  Chronicles  after  Kings,  and  before  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah— the  natural  order  as  Ezra-Nehemiah  is  the 
sequel  to  Chronicles.  In  the  Masoretic  lists  and  in  the 
Spanish  MSS.,  Chronicles  stands  at  the  beginning  and  Ezra- 
Nehemiah  at  the  end  of  the  Hagiographa;  in  the  Talmud, 
most  German  MSS.  and  the  early  printed  editions,  Chronicles 
stands  at  the  end  of  the  Hagiographa,  immediately  after  Ezra- 
Nehemiah.3  Apparently,  when  the  division  was  made,  it  was 
intended  to  place  Ezra-Nehemiah  in  the  Canon,  and  exclude 

^  ii.  Chron.  xxxvi.  22  i.  —  Ezra  i.  i-3a. 

■  Verse  23b /3  (Chron.)  is  the  first  half  of  the  second  sentence  in 
verse  3  (Ezra). 

'  GiNSBURG,  Introduction,  pp.  6  ff. ;  article  "  Chronicles,"  Dr. 
Hastings'  Bible  Dictionary. 

107 


io8  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Chronicles,  as  a  superfluous  and  inferior  variant  of  Kings. 
The  ragged  end,  so  to  speak,  left  to  Chronicles,  points  to  the 
same  conclusion.  But  after  the  Hagiographa  were  otherwise 
complete.  Chronicles  was  added,  sometimes  at  the  beginning, 
sometimes  at  the  end.  After  this  addition  Chronicles  still 
formed  one,  and  Ezra-Nehemiah  another  single  book;  the 
present  division  into  i.  and  ii.  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah 
is  due  to  the  LXX.,  in  some  MSS.  of  which,  however,  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah  still  make  up  one  book,  Esdras  B. 

The  Hebrew  title  of  Chronicles  is  Dibhr^  hay-Yamtm^ 
or  "Annals";  whence  E.V.,  Chronicles}  The  LXX.  is 
Ta  Paraleipoviena^  usually  explained  as  "the  things 
passed  over,"  />.,  in  Samuel  and  Kings;  whence  Vulg. 
Paraldpomenon.  In  Hebrew  and  E.V.  the  other  two 
books  are  styled  Ezra  and  Nehemiahy  originally  Ezra- 
Nehemiah  went  by  the  name  Ezra;  when  they  were  divided 
Nehemiah  was  a  natural  title  for  the  second  book.  The  Vulg. 
styles  them  i.  and  ii.  Esdras;  the  LXX.,  either  Esdras  B*  (as 
one  book)  or  Esdras  B  and  Nehemiah. 

The  iii.  Esdras  of  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.,  the  i.  Esdras  of 
the  English  Apocrypha,  is  a  variant  edition  of  our  Ezra ;  see 
chapter  on  the  Apocrypha. 

2.  Date  and  Authorship  of  Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah. — 
The  author's  name  is  unknown ;  his  interest  in  the  Levites 
and  the  Temple  music  suggests  that  he  belonged  to  one  of 
the  Levitical  choirs.  The  contents  of  the  work  show  that  it 
is  considerably  later  than  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  458-432. 
Nehemiah  xii.  lof.  mentions  Jaddua,  high  priest  in  the  time 
of  Alexander  the  Great,  c,  330.  In  i.  Chronicles  iii.  24,  the 
genealogy  of  David  extends,  according  to  the  Hebrew  Text, 
to  the  sixth,  according  to  the  LXX.,  Syriac,  and  Vulg.,  to  the 
eleventh  generation  after  Zerubbabel,  />.,  to  c.  350  or  to 
c.  200.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  no  trace  either  of  the 
sufferings  or  triumphs  of  the  Maccabean  period,  c.  170-140. 

^  To  be  carefully  distinguished  from  the  "  Chronicles  "  cited  in  Kings. 
'^  In  Lagarde's  Lucianic  Text  as  Esdras  A. 


SOURCES   OF  CHRONICLES  109 

Hence  the  date  is  usually  fixed  as  300-250.  The  style  and 
language  are  consistent  with  this  date,  and  with  the  reference 
to  the  book  in  Ecclesiasticus^  xlix.  13. 

3.  Sources  of  Chronicles.— Chronicles  cites  a  number  of 
authorities :  (i.)  "  The  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and 
Israel,"  for  Asa,  II.  xvi.  11,  Amaziah,  II.  xxv.  26,  Ahaz,  11. 
xxviii.  26;  (ii.)  "The  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel  and 
Judah,"  for  Jotham,  II.  xxvii.  7,  Josiah,  II.  xxxv.  26  f. ;  (iii.) 
"  The  Acts  of  the  Kings  of  Israel,"  for  Manasseh,  II.  xxxiii. 
18;  (iv.)  "The  Words  of  Samuel  the  Seer,"  for  David,  I. 
xxix.  29;  (v.)  "The  Words  of  Nathan  the  Prophet,"  for 
David,  I.  xxix.  29,  Solomon,  II.  ix.  29;  (vi.)  "The  Words  of 
Gad  the  Seer,"  for  David,  I.  xxix.  29;  (vii.)  "The  Words  of 
Shemaiah  the  Prophet  and  of  Iddo  the  Seer,"  for  Rehoboam, 
II.  xii.  15;  (viii.)  "The  Words  of  Jehu  ben-Hanani,"  for 
Jehoshaphat,  II.  xx.  34 :  (ix.)  "  The  Words  of  the  Seers," 2  for 
Manasseh,  II.  xxxiii.  19  ;  (x.)  "The  Vision  of  Iddo  the  Seer," 
for  Solomon,  II.  ix.  29 ;  (xi.)  "  The  Vision  of  Isaiah  the 
Prophet,"  for  Hezekiah,  II.  xxxii.  32;  (xii.)  "The  Midrash  of 
the  Book  of  Kings,"^  for  Joash,  II.  xxiv.  27;  (xiii.)  "The 
Midrash  of  the  Prophet  Iddo,"  for  Abijah,  II.  xiii.  22 ;  (xiv.) 
"The  Acts  of  Uzziah,  written  by  Isaiah  the  Prophet,"  for 
Uzziah,  II.  xxvi.  22;  (xv.)  "The  Prophecy  of  Ahijah  the 
Shilonite,"  for  Solomon,  II.  ix.  29. 

(i.),  (ii.),  (iii.),  and  perhaps  (xii.)  are  variant  titles  of  the 
same  work ;  most  or  all  of  (iv.)-(xi.),  (xiii.)-(xv.)  are  the  titles 
of  sections  of  this  work,  a  section  being  cited  by  the  name  of 
the  best  known  prophet  of  the  period  it  describes.  Thus 
"The  Words  of  Jehu  ben-Hanani"  were  "inserted  in  the 
Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel,"  and  "  The  Vision  of  Isaiah  "  is 
said  to  be  in  "The  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Israel."* 

1  c.  B.c.  180. 

«  So  LXX.,  A. v.,  R.V.  Mg. ;  Hebrew  and  R.V.  Text  "Hozai"; 
KiTTEL,  Dr.  Haupt's  Sacred  Books  of  O.T.^  reads  "  Hozayw,"  his  seers, 
with  BUDDE. 

'  i.e.,  an  edition  supplemented  by  edifying  illustrative  narratives. 
II.  XX.  34,  xxxii.  32. 


no  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

As  much  of  the  material  in  Chronicles  is  identical  with 
parts  of  Kings,  this  "  Book  of  the  Kings  "  may  be  our  Kings. 
But  Chronicles  states  that  this  "  Book  "  contained  certain  in- 
formation, which  is  not  found  in  Kings.  Hence  it  is  com- 
monly supposed  that  this  "  Book"  was  a  Midrash  or  expansion 
of  our  Kings,  and  that  perhaps  the  "  Midrash "  made  use  of 
the  sources  of  our  Kings.  There  seems  no  reason  to  suppose 
that  Chronicles  made  use  of  any  pre-exilic  sources,  with  the 
possible  exception  of  Kings,  and  some  genealogical  archives. 

Chronicles  has  borrowed,  more  or  less,  directly  or  indirectly, 
from  the  Pentateuch,  Joshua  and  Ruth;  but  chiefly  from 
Samuel  and  Kings.^    There  are  also  excerpts  from  the  Psalter. 

4.  Contents  of  Chronicles.^ 

First  Chronicles. 

I.-IX.    Genealogies. 

i.-ii.  17,  Adam  to  David. 

Compiled  from  Genesis,  Numbers,  Joshua,  i.  Kings,  and  Ruth,  unless 
the  genealogy  in  Ruth  is  from  the  source  of  ii.  5-12. 

ii.  18-55,  ^'^M  Calebites,  their  Settlements. 

Kittel  refers  25-33,  42-45,  49  to  a  source  older  than  the  Midrash ; 

iii..  The  Davidic  Dynasty  from  David  to  Anani;  17-24  --=  CA. 
Anani  was  apparently  the  head  of  the  House  of  David  in  the  time  of 
the  Chronicler.     Verses  1-16  compiled  from  ii.  Samuel  and  Kings. 

iv.  1-23,  C/i.i  Other  Judahite  Clans,  their  Settlements. 

Kittel  refers  1-20  to  an  older  source ;  c/.  on  ii.  18-55. 

iv.  24-43,  Simeonite   Clans,  Settlements,  and  Conquests, 

25-27,  ZA-AZ=Ch. 

Verses  24,  28-33  compiled  from  Genesis,  Exodus,  Numbers,  and  Joshua 
xix.  ;  most  of  the  rest  referred  by  Kittel  to  older  source. 

v.,  Ch.^  Clans,  Setdements,  Conquests,  and  Captivity  of 
Reuben,  Gad  and  Eastern  Manasseh. 

vi.  I -1 5,  Ch.i  High-priestly  dynasty  from  Aaron  to  the 
Captivity. 

*  Cf.  Contents. 

'  Longer  passages,  peculiar  to  Chron.  in  substance  as  well  as  form,  are 
denoted  by  Ch.;  shorter  fragments,  in  passages  compiled  from  Genesis- 
Kings,  are  not  indicated  unless  specially  important. 


CONTENTS   OF  CHRONICLES  in 

Some  of  the  names  also  occur  in  the  earlier  historical  books.  Kittel 
refers  5-15  to  an  older  source. 

vi.  16-48,  Ch.^  Genealogies  of  Heman,  Asaph,  and  Ethan, 
the  traditional  ancestors  of  the  Levitical  choirs. 

vi.  49-53  =  4-8,  Ch.^  High-priestly  dynasty  from  Aaron  to 
Solomon. 

vi.  54-81  ■=  Joshua  xxi.  5-39,  Priestly  and  Levitical  Cities. 

vii.,  Ch.y  Clans  of  Issachar,  Benjamin,  Naphtali,  Manasseh, 
Ephraim,  Asher. 

Kittel  refers  14-19,  2ib-24  to  older  source. 

viii.,  Ch.^  Clans  of  Benjamin,  Descendants  of  Saul. 

Kittel  considers  viii.,  which  is  a  variant  of  vii.  6-12,  as  a  later  addition. 
Such  passages  may,  however,  be  additions  made  by  the  Chronicler  himself 
to  the  material  he  obtained  from  his  main  source. 

ix.,  C7/.,  Chief  families,  Priests,  Levites,  Gate-keepers  at  Jeru- 
salem after  the  Return,  Saul's  Descendants. 

Verses  i  f.  =Ezra  ii.  7o=Nehemiah  vii.  73a,  xi.  3b;  3-i7a=Nehemiah 
xi.  4- 1 9a;  35-44,  Saul's  descendants,  is  repeated  from  viii.  29-38. 

X.-XXIX.,  David. 

X.  f.  =  1.  Samuel  xxxi.y  it.  Samuel  v.  1-3,  6-10,  xxiii.  8-39; 
except  X.  13/,  xi.  10,  41^-47  =C^.,  Saul's  Death,  David's 
Accession  and  Capture  of  Jerusalem,  His  Heroes. 

Kittel  refers  xi.  4ib-47  to  older  source. 

xii.  =  Ch.^  Warriors  who  came  to  David  at  Ziklag  and  at 
Hebron. 

xiii.  f.  =  /V.  Samuel  vi,  i-ii,  v,  11-23/  except  xiii.  1-5,* 
xtv.  i'j=Ch.,  Unsuccessful  attempt  to  bring  the  Ark  to 
Jerusalem,  Hiram,  David's  Sons,  Victories  over  the  Philistines. 

XV.  f.,  Ch.j  The  Ark  brought  to  Zion. 

Based  on  ii.  Samuel  vi.  12-20,  fragments  of  which  are  reproduced 
in  XV.  25-xvi.  3,  43.  The  psalm  in  xvi.  is  compiled  from  Psalms  cv.  1-15, 
xcvi.  I- 1 3,*  cvi.  I,  47  f. 

xvii.-xx.  = //'.  Samuel  vii.  f.,  ^.,  xi.  i,  xii.  26,  30/,  xxi. 
18-22,  Nathan's  Prophecy,  Wars  with  Ammonites,  etc., 
David's  Ministers,  and  Heroes. 

xxi.-xxii.    I,    Census,    consequent    Pestilence,    stayed    by 

sacrifice  at  Araunah's  Threshing-floor. 

A  much  altered  edition  of  ii.  Samuel  xxiv.  Satan,  and  not  Jehovah, 
tempts  David  to  number  Israel;  Levi  and  Benjamin  are  not  numbered. 
Instead  of  buying  the  threshing-floor  and  the  oxen  for  fifty  shekels  of 


112  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

silver,  he  buys  "  the  place  "  (of  the  threshing-floor)  for  six  hundred  shekels 
of  gold. 

xxii.  2-xxix.,  Ch.y  Instructions  to  Solomon  as  to  the 
Building  of  the  Temple,  Organisation,  etc.  of  the  Levites, 
Priests,  Singers,  Gate-keepers,  the  Army,  and  the  Tribes, 
Instructions  to  Solomon  and  Israel  as  to  the  Temple, 
Offerings  of  the  people  for  the  Temple,  David's  Thanks- 
giving, Solomon  anointed  King,  David's  Death. 

Second  Chronicles. 
I.-IX.,  Solomon. 
i.  1-13,  Sacrifice,  Dream  and  Choice  at  Gibeon. 
Revised   edition   of   i.    Kings   iii.    4-13,   introducing   the   "Tent  of 
Meeting." 

i.  14-17  =  /.  Kings  X.  26-29,  Horses  and  Chariots. 
Kings  states  that  Solomon  made  silver  to  be  as  stones  in  Jerusalem, 
Chronicles  expands  this  to  silver  and  gold. 

ii.-vii..  Building  and  Dedication  of  the  Temple. 

A  very  much  expanded  version  of  i.  Kings  v.-ix. ;  chapters  ii.,  iii., 
V.  11-13,  vi.  12  f.,  40-vii.  6,  11-15  are  almost  entirely  the  work  of  the 
Chronicler.  He  introduces  the  Levites  and  singers,  and  the  courses  of 
the  priests,  v.  11  f.,  and  the  keeping  of  the  Feast  (Tabernacles)  on  the 
eighth  day,  according  to  the  Priestly  Code. 

viii.  f.  =  /.  Kings  ix.  10/,  I'j-xi;  except  viii.  12-16,*  and 
many  small  additions  to  ix.  =  Ck.,  Organisation  of  the  King- 
dom, Queen  of  Sheba. 

In  i.  Kings  ix.  10  f.  Solomon  gives  cities  to  Hiram ;  in  Ch.  viii.  2, 
which  corresponds  to  it  in  the  arrangement  of  material,  Hiram  gives  cities 
to  Solomon. 

X.-XXXVI.,  Division  of  the  Two  Kingdoms  to  the 
Restoration. 

X.  ff.  =  /'.  Kings  xii,  1-24,  xiv.  25-28,  21 ;  except  xi.  S-xii.  i, 
xii.  2d-8  =  C/i.,  Rehoboam. 

The  Ck.  sections  enumerate  R's  buildings,  the  migration  of  the  Levites 
to  Judah,  R's  family,  and  the  warning  of  Shemaiah. 

xiii.  I  f.  =  /.  Kings  xv.  i/,  7^,  Abijah. 

xiii.  3-22,  Ch.^  Abijah's  Victory  over  Jeroboam. 

Abijah  is  a  bad  king  in  Kings.  , 

xiv.  i-xv.  15,  Ch.y  Asa — Suppression  of  the  High  Places, 
Defeat  of  Zerah  the  Ethiopian,  Prophecy  of  Azariah  ben 
Oded. 


CONTENTS  OF  CHRONICLES  113 

Portions  of  i.  Kings  xv.  8-12  are  reproduced  in  xiv.  1-5.  Zerah  is 
sometimes  identified  with  Osorkon  II.,  King  of  Egypt,  who  claims  to 
have  made  a  successful  campaign  in  Palestine,  c.  2>66.  Kittel  refers  xiv. 
8  f.,*  II,  1 2a  to  older  source.  Oded^  xv.  8,  for  Azariah  ben  Oded  is 
due  to  a  corruption  of  the  text. 

XV.  i6-xvi.  6  =  /.  Kings  xv,  13-22,  Asa — Maachah  deposed, 
High  Places  not  suppressed,  Alliance  with  Benhadad  against 
Israel. 

xvi.  7-14,  C^.,  Asa — Prophecy  and  Imprisonment  of 
Hanani,  Disease  and  Death  of  Asa. 

Fragments  of  i.  Kings  xv.  23  f.  in  xvi.  12  ff. 

xvii.,  Ch.^  Jehoshaphat — Itinerant  Priests  and  Levites  teach 
the  Law,  Peaceful  Prosperity. 

Kittel  refers  "  sent "  in  7,  and  8b,  9  to  older  source. 

xviii.  =/.  Kings  xxii.  2-35^,  Jehoshaphat  and  Ahab  at 
Ramoth  Gilead. 

Verses  i  f.,  mainly  Ch. 

xix.-xx.  30,  Ch.^  Jehoshaphat — Prophecy  of  Jehu  ben 
Hanani,  Priests  and  Levites  as  Judges,  Invading  Ammonites, 
Moabites,  etc.  exterminate  one  another  while  the  Levitical 
choirs  sing  praises. 

XX.  31-37,  Jehoshaphat — Summary,  Alliance  with  Ahaziah, 
Loss  of  Navy. 

Based  on  i.  Kings  xxii.  41  ff.,  48  f. ;  the  condemnation  of  the  alliance 
with  Israel,  and  the  prophecy  of  Eiiezer  are  Ch. 

xxi.  =  /'.  Kings  xxii.  50,  //.  Kings  viii.  17-22,  24a;  except 
2-4,  10^-20=  Ch.^  Jehoram. 

Ch.  sections  include  Jehoram's  Massacre  of  his  Brethren,  Elijah's  writ- 
ing to  Jehoram,  and  the  Misfortunes  of  Jehoram. 

xxii.  1-9,  Ahaziah. 

Based  on,  and  partly  extracted  from  ii.  Kings  viii,  24-x. 

xxii.  lo-xxiii.,  Athaliah. 

Revised  edition  of  ii.  Kings  xi.  1-20,  e.g.,  the  Levitical  temple-guard 
of  the  Chronicler's  times  is  substituted  for  the  foreign  mercenary  body- 
guard of  the  Davidic  kings. 

xxiv.,  Joash. 

Revised  and  expanded  edition  of  ii.  Kings  xi.  21-xii.,  e.g.^  the  Apos- 
tasy of  Joash,  and  the  Martyrdom  of  Zechariah  are  Ch. 

xxy.  =  ii.  Kings  xiv.  2-14,  17,  19/,  except  5-ii«,  12-16  = 

C/i.,  Amaziah. 

Ch.  sections  include  Dismissal  of  Israelite  Mercenaries  at  the  bidding 
of  a  Man  of  God,  and  Amaziah's  Apostasy  rebuked  by  a  Prophet. 

I 


114  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

xxvi.,  Ch.\  except  1-4  =  ti.  Kings  xiv.  21/,  xv.  2/,  and 
20-23  include  fragments  of  xv.  ^ff.,  Uzziah. 

Ch.  portions  include  the  Mission  of  Zechariah,  Uzziah's  Victories,  His 
Intrusion  into  the  Temple.     Kittel  refers  6,  8a,  9  f.  to  older  source. 

xxvii.=/V.  Kings  xv,  33-34,  35^»  3^ ;  except  2b,  3^-7  =  C^, 
Jotham. 

Kittel  refers  4  ff.,  Buildings  and  Wars  to  older  source, 
xxviii.,  Ahaz. 

Revised  and  expanded  edition  of  ii.  Kings  xvi.  Ch.  adds  the  Mission 
of  Oded,  Release  of  Judahite  captives,  Invasions  by  Edomites  and 
Philistines,  etc. 

xxix.-xxxii.,  Hezekiah. 

Revised  and  expanded  edition  of  ii.  Kings  xviii.-xx.  Ch.  minimises 
the  part  played  by  Isaiah  ;  and  inserts  profuse  details  as  to  Temple  ritual, 
Levites  and  singers.  Kittel  refers  xxxii.  30,  as  far  as  **  David,"  to  older 
source. 

xxxiii.  1-20  =  /V.  Kings  xxi.  i-io,  18;  except  ii-i9=C^., 
Manasseh. 

Ch.  section  contains  M.'s  Captivity,  Repentance,  and  Buildings. 

xxxiii.  21-25,  Amon. 

Expanded  from  ii.  Kings  xxi.  19-24. 

xxxiv.  f,  Josiah. 

Revised  and  expanded  edition  of  ii.  Kings  xxii.-xxiii.  30.  Ch.  adds, 
an  express  statement  that  Hilkiah  found  the  law-book,  xxxiv.  14,  repeated 
identifications  of  the  law-book  with  the  Law  of  Moses,  profuse  details  as  to 
ritual,  priests,  Levites  and  singers,  Josiah's  neglect  of  the  message  sent  to 
him  from  God  through  Pharaoh  Necho,  xxxv.  21  f. 

xxxvi.  1-2 1,  Jehoahaz,  Jehoiakim,  Jehoiachin,  Zedekiah. 
Compiled  from  ii.  Kings  xxiii.  30-xxv.  21.     Ch,  introduces  a  reference 
to  Jeremiah,  xxxvi.  12. 

xxxvi.  2  2  L  =  Ezra  i.  1-3^7,  The  Decree  of  Cyrus. 

5.  Historical  Character  and  Teaching  of  Chronicles.— The 
Chronicler's  selection  and  statement  of  history  were  intended 
to  enforce,  in  the  most  emphatic  way,  the  teaching  he  had 
most  at  heart.1  He  wished  to  give  object  lessons  in  the 
observance  of  the  Law.     The  Law,  he  held,  was  not  observed 

*  The  Chronicler  and  the  author  of  his  main  source,  the  Midrash  on 
Kings,  were  of  the  same  mind  and  temper,  so  that  in  speaking  of  the 
Chronicler,  we  include  the  author  of  the  Midrash.  But  the  dependence  of 
Chron.  on  this  source  shifts  the  responsibility  for  narratives  not  found  in 
Genesis-Kings  from  the  author  of  the  canonical  book  to  his  authority. 


THE   TEACHING  OF  CHRONICLES     115 

before  David,  or  in  that  product  of  schism  and  treason,  the 
Northern  kingdom.  Hence  he  confines  his  history  to  the 
Davidic  monarchy,  even  at  the  expense  of  sacrificing  the 
history  of  EHjah  and  EHsha.  He  describes  David,  Solomon, 
Jehoshaphat,  Hezekiah,  and  Josiah  as  worshipping  with  a  full 
accompaniment  of  ritual,  priests,  Levites  and  choirs,  and 
according  to  the  laws  of  the  complete  Pentateuch;  for  he 
assumed  that  what  was  binding  in  his  own  day  must  have 
been  observed  by  the  good  kings.  The  Chronicler  was 
anxious  to  teach  that  virtue  and  vice  invariably  meet  with 
their  due ;  Kings  had  not  always  recorded  the  sins  which  in- 
volved a  disastrous  close  to  the  reigns  of  good  kings,  or  the 
misfortunes  which  punished  the  wickedness  of  bad  kings. 
The  Chronicler,  as  far  as  his  source  permitted,  supplied  these 
defects.^ 

As  far  as  possible,  nothing  is  told  of  the  good  kings 
which  would  weaken  the  force  of  their  good  examples.  Thus 
the  incidents  of  Uriah  and  Bathsheba,  of  Amnon,  Tamar, 
and  Absalom,  are  entirely  omitted.  The  Chronicler  also 
exalts  his  heroes  by  giving  them  large  armies,  great  wealth 
and  splendour  2;  and  shows  a  fondness  for  statistics  and 
genealogies. 

Professor  Sayce  writes  thus  ^ :  "  The  consistent  exaggera- 
tion of  numbers  on  the  part  of  the  Chronicler  shows  us  that 
from  a  historical  point  of  view  his  unsupported  statements 
must  be  received  with  caution.  But  they  do  not  justify  the 
accusations  of  deliberate  fraud  and  *  fiction '  which  have  been 
brought  against  him.  What  they  prove  is  that  he  did  not 
possess  that  sense  of  historical  exactitude  which  we  now 
demand  from  the  historian.  He  wrote,  in  fact,  with  a  didactic 
and  not  with  a  historical  purpose.  That  he  should  have  used 
the  framework  of  history  to  illustrate  the  lessons  he  wished  to 
draw  was  as  much  an  accident  as  that  Sir  Walter  Scott  should 

*  Cf.  Contents  on  ii.  Chron.  xxiv.  f.,  Joash  and  Amaziah,  and  xxxv. 
21  f.  on  Josiah. 

"^  Cf.  Contents  on  II.  i;  14-17,  Solomon; 
'  Higher  Crit.,  1894,  p.  464. 


il6  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

have  based  certain  of  his  novels  on  the  facts  of  mediaeval 
history.  He  cared  as  little  for  history  in  the  modern 
European  sense  of  the  word  as  the  Oriental  of  to-day,  who 
considers  himself  at  Uberty  to  embellish  or  modify  the  narra- 
tive he  is  repeating  in  accordance  with  his  fancy  or  the  moral 
he  wishes  to  draw  from  it." 

In  considering  the  value  of  Chronicles,  we  must  deal 
separately  with  the  different  kinds  of  material. 

(a)  Material  takefi  from  Genesis-Kings^  etc. — Chronicles 
preserves  an  alternative  text,  which  sometimes  gives  the  better 
reading. 

(b)  Material  from  Older  Sources, — If  Kittel  is  right  in 
assigning  certain  passages  ^  to  a  source  older  than  the  Midrash, 
we  possess  in  Chronicles  some  fragments  of  information,  e.g.^ 
as  to  the  Invasion  of  Zerah,  not  given  in  Genesis-Kings,  but 
derived  from  early,  perhaps  pre-exilic  sources. 

(c)  Narratives  not  traceable  earlier  than  the  Midrash  of 
Kings. — Narratives  which  give  no  indication  of  early  origin 
rest  simply  on  the  unsupported  testimony  of  a  document 
composed  from  700  to  300  years  later  than  the  events 
described.     For  the  teaching  of  {a\  {b\  (c)  see  chapter  ii., 

§33. 

(d)  Narratives  of  Earlier  Events  in  Terms  of  the  Institutions 
and  Ideas  of  tlie  Chronicler's  Own  Tifnes. — Here  an  example 
was  set  which  is  constantly  imitated ;  teachers  and  preachers 
often  seek  to  make  a  Biblical  narrative  more  impressive  by 
teUing  the  story  as  if  the  event  had  happened  in  the  nine- 
teenth century.  Probably  Chronicles  was  very  useful  in  this  way 
to  the  Jews  of  the  period.  To  us  this  material  is  valuable 
as  revealing  the  institutions  and  ideas  of  the  Chronicler's 
time;  the  comparison  with  Kings  enables  us  to  contrast  the 
Jewish  community  with  ancient  Israel.  Moreover  the  utter- 
ances ascribed  by  Chronicles  to  its  characters  often  contain 
most  useful  and  suggestive  teaching ;  they  were  the  expression 
of  deep  and  real  experience,  and  they  still  help  to  renew  and 
express  such  experience. 

^  Not  found  in^Gen. -Kings.    Cf.  Contents  on  I.  iv.,  vi.  f.,  II.  xiv.,  xvii. 


SOURCES   OF  EZRA-NEHEMIAH       117 

6.  Use  of  Chronicles  in  N.T. — It  is  possible  that  some 
of  the  persons  in  Luke's  genealogy,  iii.  2b  f.,  are  identical 
with  persons  mentioned  only  in  I.  iii.  19-22.  Matthew  ix.  36 
is  more  closely  parallel  to  ii.  Chronicles  xviii.  16,  peculiar 
to  Chronicles,  than  to  Numbers  xxvii.  17  or  Ezekiel  xxxiv.  5 ; 
but  it  may  have  been  suggested  by  either  of  the  latter,  or 
may  be  simply  the  current  form  of  a  popular  figure.  The 
"Zachariah,  son  of  Barachiah,  whom  ye  slew  between  the 
sanctuary  and  the  altar"  (Matthew  xxiii.  35) ^  is  identified 
with  the  Zachariah,  the  son  of  Jehoiada,  whose  martyrdom 
in  the  Temple  court  is  related  in  II.  xxiv.  21,  and  nowhere 
else.  Otherwise  there  is  nothing  in  the  N.T.  to  show  that  any 
of  its  writers  were  acquainted  with  Chronicles. 

7.  Sources  of  Ezra-Nehemiah. — Ezra  vii.  27-ix.  are  in 
the  first  person,  and  are  derived  from  memoirs  composed 
by  Ezra ;  other  passages  in  Ezra-Nehemiah  may  be  based  on 
these  memoirs.2  Nehemiah  i.-vii.  5  and  xi.-xiii.  (in  part) 
are  in  the  first  person,  and  are  derived  from  memoirs 
compiled  by  Nehemiah;  other  passages  in  Nehemiah  may 
be  based  on  these  memoirs.^  Both  sets  of  memoirs  may 
be  dated  c.  430.  Ezra  iv.  8-vi.  18,  vii.  12-26,  which  are  in 
Western  or  Palestinian  Aramaic,  are  taken  from  another 
source,  which  may  be  dated  c.  450.^  Ezra-Nehemiah  also 
contains  a  series  of  official  documents :  the  Decree  of 
Cyrus,  Ezra  i.  1-4;  Letters  between  Rehum  and  Artaxerxes, 
iv.  7-23;  Letters  between  Tattenai  and  Darius,  v.  6-vi.  12; 
Artaxerxes'  Firman  to  Ezra,  vii.  11-26.  The  authenticity  of 
these  documents  is  matter  of  controversy.*  Ezra  iv.  7-23  is 
out  of  place,  and  belongs  to  the  building,  not  of  the  Temple, 
but  of  the  walls.  Probably,  as  in  Chronicles,  the  Chronicler 
did  not  compile  Ezra-Nehemiah  from  the  original  sources, 

^  Also  Luke  xi.  51,  where  the  father's  name  is  omitted.  The  first  hand 
of  Cod.  Sin.  omits  it  in  Matt.,  and  Jerome  states  that  the  Nazarene  Gospel 
had  "  son  of  Jehoiada  "  in  Matt.     (Tisch. ) 

2  C/.  Contents.  ^  Kautzsch,  Cornill. 

*  They  were  rejected  by  Kosters,  //e^  Herstel^  etc.,  German  Trans., 
but  are  accepted  by  Kautzsch,  and  with  the  exception  of  i.  1-4  by  Meyer, 
Enistehung,  etc. 


ii8  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

but  revised  a  compilation  already  made,^  possibly  a  portion 
of  the   same  work,  parts   of  which   are  referred  to  as  the 
Took  of  Kings,"  etc.,  or  the    "Midrash  of  the  Book  of 
Kings,"  etc. 

8.  Historical  Accuracy  of  Ezra-Nehemiah.  — It  has  been 

maintained  ^  that  the  Chronicler,  or  one  of  his  authorities,  has 
entirely  misunderstood  the  course  of  the  history  on  two 
main  points. 

(a)  The  Return  and  Buildifig  of  the  Temple. — There  was,  it 
is  said,  no  Return  in  538 ;  there  was  no  attempt  to  rebuild  the 
Temple  till  the  time  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  520 ;  and  the 
Temple  was  rebuilt  by  the  Jewish  community  left  behind  in 
Palestine,  when  the  bulk  of  the  population  were  carried  away 
captive  in  586.  The  main  argument  for  this  view  is  that 
Haggai  and  Zechariah  make  no  reference  to  any  Return,  or  to 
any  previous  work  towards  the  building  of  the  Temple.  The 
treatment  of  the  history  in  Kings  by  the  Chronicler  or  his 
source,  weakens  the  authority  of  the  statements  in  Ezra  i.-vi. 
Yet  the  silence  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah  does  not  seem  con- 
clusive disproof  of  statements  made  even  as  late  as  250. 
There  would  still  be,  one  would  suppose,  a  substantially 
accurate  tradition  as  to  the  origin  of  the  Temple  and  the 
Jewish  community. 

Cheyne's  Introd.  to  Isaiah^  xxxviii.  f. ,  substantially  adopts  Kosters'  view. 
G.  A.  Smith,  in  a  careful  discussion  of  the  subject  in  Book  of  the  Twelve^ 
p.  204  ff.,  concludes  that  the  Return  took  place  in  537,  and  that  the  Jews 
who  returned  rebuilt  the  Temple,  and  probably  made  some  beginning 
immediately  after  the  Return.  Meyer,  Entstehung,  combats  Kosters' 
view  at  length,  and  it  has  also  been  rejected  by  Kuenen  and  Wellhausen 
(ap,  Meyer).  Many  critics,  however,  who  accept  the  Return,  maintain 
that  no  attempt  was  made  to  rebuild  the  Temple  before  520. 

(b)  The  Date  of  Ezra's  Mission. — It  is  also  maintained  ^ 
that  Ezra's  mission  and  reforms  took  place — not,  as  the 
Chronicler  represents,  in  458,  before  Nehemiah's  first  term 
of  office,  but — either  in  Nehemiah's  second  term  of  office, 

1  Cf.  CoRNiLL^  p.  135. 

=  Kosters,  Het  Herstel^  etc.,  German  Trans. 

'  Kosters,  etc. 


CONTENTS  OF  EZRA-NEHEMIAH     119 

432  ;  or  even  in  the  seventh  year  of  Artaxerxes  II.,  398.  The 
different  sections  of  Nehemiah  have  to  be  re-arranged  and 
Ezra  vii.-x.  is  placed  immediately  before  Nehemiah  ix.,  x. 
These  views  have  met  with  little  acceptance. 

9.  Contents  of  Ezra-Nehemiah. 

Ezra. 

I.-VI.    Return,  Rebuilding  of  Temple. 

i.,  Ch.^  Decree  of  Cyrus,  Return. 

Ch,  is  used,  as  in  Chronicles,  for  matter  composed  by  the  Chronicler, 
or  by  the  author  of  his  late  post-exilic  Midrashic  source. 

ii.-iii.  I  =  Nehemiah  vii.  6-vm.  la,  Statistics  of  those  who 

returned  under  Cyrus,   their   gifts  to  the    building  of   the 

Temple. 

In  Nehemiah  vii.  5,  Nehemiah  states  that  he  found  this  list  in  a  book  ; 
possibly  a  contemporary  record.  Ch.  has  repeated  it  here  from  Nehemiah 
vii.,  and,  in  a  most  curious  fashion,  has  utilised  Nehemiah  vii.  73b,  viii. 
I  a,  the  opening  verse  of  the  account  of  the  promulgation  of  the  Law,  as 
the  opening  verse,  Ezra  iii.  i ,  of  the  account  of  the  laying  of  the  founda- 
tion stone  of  the  Temple.  Kosters  holds  that  this  list  does  not  refer  to  a 
Return  under  Cyrus,  but  is  a  census  of  the  population  in  the  time  of  Ezra- 
Nehemiah,  and  that  the  book  in  which  it  was  found  was  Ezra's  Memoirs. 
There  are  numerous  variations,  especially  as  to  names  and  numbers,  in  the 
three  texts  of  this  list,  Ezra  ii. ;  i.  or  iii.  Esdras  v. ;  Nehemiah  vii. 

iii.~iv.  5,  Ch.f  Altar  of  Burnt  Offering,  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 
Foundation  Stone,  Opposition  of  Samaritans. 

iv.  6  f.,  Complaints  made  against  the  Jews  to  Xerxes  and 
Artaxerxes. 

The  te^t  is  probably  corrupt ;  the  verses  were  used  by  CA.  or  his  source 
as  an  introduction  to  the  next  section. 

iv.  8-23,  Aramaic  Source^  Letters  between  the  Persian 
Governor  and  Artaxerxes. 

Out  of  place  here,  belonging  properly  to  the  end  of  interval  between 
the  arrival  of  Ezra  and  that  of  Nehemiah. 

iv.  24-vi.  18,  Aramaic  Source^  Rebuilding  and  Dedication 

of  the  Temple,  Letters  between  the  Persian  Governor  and 

Darius. 

iv.  24  is  the  continuation  of  iv.  5,  and  is  probably  Ch, 

vi.  19-22,  Ch.t  Passover. 

Darius  is  styled  "  King  of  Assyria,'*  -' 


120  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

VII.-X.     Mission  of  Ezra. 

vii.  i-ii,  Ch.^  Introductory  Abstract. 

vii.  12-26,  Aramaic  Source^  Firman  of  Artaxerxes  to  Ezra. 

vii.  27-ix.,  Ezra^s  Memoirs  in  the  First  Person^  Thanks- 
giving to  God  for  Firman,  Ezra's  Companions,  Journey, 
Attempt  to  suppress  Intermarriage  with  Foreigners. 

X.,  Ezra^s  Memoirs^  edited  by  Ch.^  Conclusion  of  account  of 
Attempt  to  suppress  Intermarriage  with  Foreigners. 

Though  ix.  and  x.  are  essentially  one  narrative,  x.  changes  to  the  third 
person,  probably  because  Ch,  has  recast  this  portion  of  Ezra's  Memoirs. 

Nehemiah. 

i.-vii.  5,  NehemiaKs  Memoirs  in  the  First  Person^ 
Nehemiah's  Mission,  Rebuilding  of  the  Walls,  in  spite  of 
the  Opposition  of  the  Samaritans  and  their  allies,  Measures 
for  the  ReHef  of  Debtors. 

vii.  6-viii.  13.  =  Ezra  ii.-iii.  i,  ^.v. 

vii.  73b-x.,  Ezra's  Memoirs  recast  by  Ch.y  Promulgation  of 
the  Law,  and  Covenant  to  observe  it. 

The  Law  was  probably  the  Priestly  Code ;  cf.  chapter  i.  \\  19  f. 

xi.,  Migration  from  the  country  to  Jerusalem,  Location  of 
the  Clans  in  Jerusalem  and  the  country. 

An  official  list,  part  of  which  is  given  in  i.  Chronicles  ix.  1-17.  It 
is  freely  edited  by  Ch.  from  a  list,  which  probably  belonged  to  Nehemiah's 
Memoirs,  and  followed  vii.  5. 

xii.  1-26,  Ch.^  Chiefs  of  the  Priestly  and  Levitical  Clans. 

Note  the  reference  to  Jaddua,  High  Priest  under  Alexander,  in  22,  and 
to  a  "  Book  of  Chronicles"  '  in  23. 

xii.  27-43,  Nehemiah! s  Memoirs  in  the  First  Person^  with 
additions  by  Ch.,  Dedication  of  the  Walls. 

xii.  44--xiii.  3,  Ch.^  Provision  for  Priests  and  Levites, 
Extrusion  of  Foreigners. 

xiii.  4-31,  Nehefniahs  Memoirs  in  the  First  Person, 
Nehemiah's  Return  to  Artaxerxes,  and  Second  Term  of 
Office,  Expulsion  of  Tobiah  the  Ammonite  from  the  Temple, 
Provision  for  Levites  and  Singers,  Safeguarding  the  Sabbath, 

^  Sepher  Dibhri  hay  •  Ydtnim. 


ESTHER  121 

Renewed  Attempt  to  suppress  Intermarriage  with  Foreigners, 
Expulsion  of  a  grandson  of  the  High  Priest,  who  was  son-in- 
law  of  Sanballat.^ 

10.  Esther. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — The    local   colouring   suggests 

that  the  author  Hved  in  Persia,  nothing  else  is  known  of  him. 

The  absence  of  any  reference  to  the  book  in  Ecclesiasticus 

points  to  a  date  not  much  earlier  than  B.C.   200,  and  this 

conclusion    is    confirmed    by    the    language ;    its    linguistic 

affinities    are    with    Daniel,    Chronicles    and    post-BibHcal 

Hebrew,  and  there  are  Aramaisms. 

Esther  is  ascribed  to  the  earlier  Greek  period  by  Adeney,  Exp.  Bible^ 
p.  353,  Cheyne,  Encycl.  Brit.y  Driver,  etc.  ;  to  a  later  date  by  Cornill, 
c.  B.C.  130,  Kautzsch,  c.  B.C.  150,  Wildeboer,  after  B.C.  135,  and  Siegfried. 

(b)  Canonicity. — The  canonicity  of  Esther  was  contested 
amongst  the  Jews,  even  apparently  after  the  Synod  of  Jamnia, 
c.  A.D.  90,  for  the  book  is  absent  from  the  list  of  books  of 
the  Jewish  O.T.  obtained  by  Melito,  Bishop  of  Sardis, 
A.D.  1 50-1 75.2  The  exaggerated  enthusiasm  of  later  Rabbis, 
e.g.^  Maimonides,^  for  the  book  suggests  an  uneasy  conscious- 
ness of  its  lack  of  full  authority.  The  Church,  like  the 
Rabbis,  hesitated  over  Esther;  even  as  late  as  the  fourth 
century,  Athanasius  and  Gregory  Nazianzen  do  not  include 
the  book  in  the  Canon.  Its  position  was  doubtful  in  the 
East  throughout  the  Middle  Ages;*  but  in  the  West  its 
acceptance  by  the  Council  of  Carthage,  a.d.  397,  assured 
its  position  till  the  Reformation.  Luther,  however,  spoke  of 
the  book  as  "judaising"  and  "containing  many  heathenish 
improprieties,"  and  said  he  wished  it  did  not  exist. 

(c)  The  Greek  Esther. — In  the  LXX.  there  are  numerous 
late  interpolations,  designed  to  remedy  supposed  defects  in 
religious  and  other  matters,  e.g.^  in  these  additions  "God" 

^  For  teaching  see  chapter  ii.  §  33.  There  is  no  trace  of  Ezra- 
Nehemiah  in  N.T. 

'  Eus.  Hist.  iv.  26. 

'  The  Law  and  Esther  will  survive  all  the  rest  of  the  O.T, 

*  Rejected  by  Nicephorus  Callistus,  A.D.  1333.  Westcott,  Bible  in 
the  Churchy  227. 


122  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

and  "Lord"  occur  frequently,  and  Mordecai  offers  a  long 

prayer. 

(d)  Contents    and  Historicity, — In    spite    of   the    general 

accuracy   in   details,   etc.   of    local   colouring,    the   book   is 

commonly  regarded  as  a  kind  of  parable  or  allegory,  with 

a    certain    basis    of    fact,    rather    than    as    exact    history. ^ 

Difficulties    have    been    found    in    the   way    in   which   the 

fact  of  Esther  and  Mordecai  being  Jews  is  in   one  place 

represented    as    known,   and    in    another    supposed    to    be 

concealed,  and  in  the  extraordinary  character  of  the  edicts 

for  the  extermination   first  of  the  Jews  and  then  of  their 

enemies,  and  in   many  other  features  of  the  story.     These 

difficulties  do  not  seem  to  furnish  a  formal  proof  that  the 

narrative  is  not  historical  in  its  main  outlines.     On  the  other 

hand,  the  probable  composition  of  the  book  in  the  Greek 

period,  and  the  absence  of  any  corroborating  references  to 

the  events  narrated,  make  its  substantial  historicity  uncertain. 

For  instance,  Mordecai  and  Esther  are  not  mentioned  in  Ecclus. 
xliv.-xlix. 

It  is  doubtful  whether  the  Feast  of  Purim  originated  as 
our  book  states.  No  Persian  word  Purim  is  known  in  the 
sense  of  lots;  but  there  was  a  Persian  feast  Farwardigan^ 
and  the  Phrouraia  or  Phroiirdaia  of  some  MSS.  of  the 
LXX.2  has  been  thought  to  identify  Purim  with  this  feast. 
Moreover,  Mordecai  and  Esther  are  the  names  of  the  well- 
known  Babylonian  gods  Marduk,  or  Merodach,  and  Ishtar. 
Accordingly  it  has  been  suggested  ^  that  the  original  basis 
of  the  book  is  a  Babylonian  myth,  which  had  been  connected 
with  the  Persian  feast,  which  was  originally  Babylonian.  This 
view  might  explain  the  entire  absence  of  any  Jewish  divine 
name — God  is  never  mentioned — and  the  hesitation  of  the 
Jews  as  to  the  canonicity  of  Esther.  But  so  startling  a 
theory  will  hardly  be  accepted  till  there  is  further  evidence 

for  it.* 

^  Driver,  Konig,  Wildeboer,  etc. 
'  The  Sinaitic  has  Phrouraia. 

*  Jensen,  ap.  Wildeboer. 

*  There  are  no  quotations  from  Esther  in  N.T. 


CHAPTER   IV. 
THE  POETICAL  BOOKS 

I.  Job.        2.  Psalms.        3.  Proverbs.        4.  Ecclesiastes. 
5.  Song  of  Songs. 

I.  Job.     Cf.  Appendix  C  on  Wisdom. 

(a)  The  Historical  Basis. — The  view  that  the  book,  as  a 
whole,  was  a  historical  record  of  things  said  and  done,  was 
widely  held  amongst  Jews  and  Christians  up  till  and  even  after 
the  Reformation.  Yet  it  was  denied  by  a  rabbi,  whose  opinion 
— that  Job  never  existed,  and  was  merely  a  parable — is  pre- 
served in  the  Talmud}  by  Maimonides,  and  by  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia,  c,  a.d.  440,  who  held  that  Job  existed,  but  that 
the  Book  of  Job  was  a  fiction,  and  a  wicked  slander  on  the 
character  of  the  Patriarch.  Luther  recognised  a  historical 
basis,  but  denied  that  the  book  was  exact  history.  The 
existence  of  Job  is  supported  by  the  references  in  Ezekiel 
xiv.  14,  20,^  and  by  the  improbability  that  both  the  hero  and 
his  story  were  pure  inventions.  But  the  whole  character  of 
the  book  shows  that  the  traditional  material  has  been  freely 
used  as  the  setting  of  a  didactic  colloquy,  which  is  partly 
paralleled  by  Plato's  Dialogues.  The  modern  view  is  well 
expressed  by  Keil,^  when  he  says  that  the  book  is  "old 
legend  wrought  up  and  sustained  throughout  with  poetic 
freedom." 

The  suggestion  that  the  Prologue  and  Epilogue  are  taken 
from  an  old  prose  history  of  Job  has  met  with  some  support.^ 
The  apparent  inconsistency  between  these  sections  and  the 

*  The  only  references  outside  of  the  Book  of  Job.  There  is  nothing  to 
connect  our  Job  with  the  Job  of  Gen.  xlvi,  13  ;  where,  moreover,  Jashub 
should  be  read  with  LXX.  and  Num.  xxvi.  24,  Ball,  S.B.O.T, 

»  O.T,  Introd,^  English  Trans.,  i.  485.  '  Duhm. 

123 


124  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

rest  of  the  book  would  be  partly  explained,  if  we  supposed 
that  the  author  felt  bound  to  conform  to  established  tradition, 
especially  with  regard  to  the  happy  ending.  Otherwise  we 
have  no  data  for  determining  the  form  in  which  the  story  was 
known  to  Ezekiel  or  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Job. 

The  names  of  persons  and  places,  as  far  as  they  occur 
elsewhere,  belong  to  Edom  or  the  neighbouring  desert.^ 
Probably,  according  to  the  ancient  tradition,  Job  was  a 
wealthy  and  pious  Edomite,  who  was  grievously  afflicted,  and 
afterwards  restored  to  prosperity. 

An  apocryphal  appendix  to  the  LXX.  identifies  Job  with 
Jobab  ben-Zerah,  king  of  Edom,^  a  conjecture  suggested  by 
the  similarity  of  the  names ;  states  that  the  book  was  trans- 
lated, whether  into  Greek  or  Hebrew  is  not  clear,  from  the 
Syriac,  and  that  Uz  was  on  the  borders  of  Edom  and  Arabia. 
It  makes  Zophar  king  of  the  Minaei,  an  Arabian  tribe. 

(b)  Date  and  Authorship, — The  author's  name  is  quite  un- 
known ;  all  existing  evidence  is  opposed  to  the  suggestion 
that  either  Job  or  Moses  wrote  the  book. 

The  date  has  to  be  determined  by  internal  evidence,  which 
has  been  variously  interpreted. 

(i.)  The  Exile  is  very  widely  accepted  as  the  period  when 
the  book,  or  its  original  edition,  was  composed,  ^  a  view 
supported  by  many  important  considerations. 

(i)  The  formal  discussion  of  the  consequences  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  divine  righteousness  as  apphed  to  the  deal- 
ings of  God  with  the  individual,  does  not  appear  to  have 
begun  much  before  the  Exile.     An  early  stage  of  the  dis- 

*  Uz^  Lam.  iv.  21  ;  Eliphaz  and  Teman,  Gen.  xxxvi.  ii,  42  P,  Jer. 
xlix.  7,  etc.  ;  Shuhite  may  connect  with  Shtiah,  one  of  the  sons  of  Abra- 
ham by  Keturah,  sent  away  by  him  eastward,  Gen.  xxv.  2,  6,  JE. 
Naamah  can  scarcely  be  the  town  in  the  south  of  Judah,  Josh.  xv.  41. 
The  mention  of  Naamah  as  the  wife  of  a  Cainite  Lamech,  suggests  the 
existence  of  a  Kenite  clan  of  that  name ;  the  meaning  of  the  word — 
pleasant — makes  it  probable  that  it  was  commonly  in  use  both  for  persons 
and  places.  '^  Gen.  xxxvi.  33,  P. 

'  Cheyne,  Joby  etc.,  67,  73  f.,  Davidson,  Driver,  Konig,  and 
DiLLMANN,  immediately  before  the  Exile ;  but  in  Introduction  to  Isaiah^ 
III,  Cheyne  writes,  re  Job  xiv.  11,  "  the  speeches  in  Job  arc  very  much 
more  probably  post-Exilic" 


JOB  125 

cussion  is  found  in  Habakkuk,  Jeremiah,  and  Ezekiel,  who 
deal  briefly  with  the  difficulty  of  the  prosperity  of  the  wicked,^ 
while  the  latter  discusses  at  length  the  question  of  visiting  the 
sins  of  the  fathers  on  the  children.  2  On  the  other  hand,  the 
author  of  Job  seems  entirely  ignorant  of  the  explanation  of 
the  sufferings  of  the  righteous  by  the  doctrine  of  Vicarious 
Atonement  given  in  Isaiah  liii.  and  other  Servant-passages. 
Hence,  the  Book  of  Job  will  be  later  than  Ezekiel,  but  not 
later  than  Isaiah  liii. ;  />.,  unless  Isaiah  liii.  is  post-exilic,  the 
Book  of  Job  is  exihc. 

(2)  There  are  numerous  parallels  with  Jeremiah,  Lamenta- 
tions, Isaiah  xl.  ff.,  and  contemporary  literature ;  but  there  is 
the  usual  difficulty  in  determining  whether  the  parallels  in- 
dicate literary  dependence,  or  merely  authorship  in  the  same 
period  and  under  similar  circumstances;  and,  if  there  is  de- 
pendence, which  parallel  is  dependent  on  the  other. ^  Also 
the  date  of  the  parallel  is  often  uncertain.  The  parallels 
between  Job  and  the  Servant  of  Jehovah  are  also  striking; 
both  are  lepers,  innocent  sufferers,  who  are  restored  and  re- 
warded. Job  xxviii.  on  Wisdom,  ^.v.,  seems  earlier  than 
Proverbs  i-ix. 

(3)  The  references  to  ruin  and  captivity  seem  reminiscences 
of  a  recent  calamity,*  possibly  the  Captivity  of  Israel,  more 
probably  that  of  Judah. 

(4)  Ezekiel  xiv.  14,  20  show  that  the  story  of  Job  was  in 
men's  minds  about  the  time  of  the  Exile,  but  do  not  suggest 
that  Ezekiel  knew  our  book.  But  the  intercession  ascribed 
to  Job  in  the  Epilogue  may  have  been  suggested  by  these 
verses. 

(5)  The  Aramaisms  and  Arabisms  of  the  book  are  perhaps 
best  explained  by  an  exilic  date.* 

1  Hab.  i.  13,  Jer.  xii.  i. 

*  Jer.  xxxi.  29,  Ezek.  xviii. 

*  Cf.  iii.,  Jer.  xx.  14  ff.,  c/.  note  on  latter ;  vi.  15,  Jer.  xv.  18;  xix.  7,  8; 
Lam.  iii.  6-9 ;  ix.  8,  Isa.  xliv.  24 ;  xiii.  28,  Isa.  1.  9 ;  xv.  35,  Isa.  lix.  4 ; 
xxvi.  12  f.,  Isa.  li.  9;  xxx.  21,  Isa.  Ixiii.  10. 

*  iii.  18-20,  vii.  I,  ix.  24,  xii.  6,  17,  xxiv.  12. 

*  Cheyne,  /od,  etc.,  99,  293  f. 


126  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(ii.)  A  post-exilic  origin  has  also  met  with  much  acceptance,' 
and  is  supported  by  the  following  considerations : — 

(i)  If  Job  in  any  way  stands  for  Israel,  the  assertions  of 
innocence  point  to  a  date  after  400. 

(2)  The  parallels  with  Isaiah  liii.,  etc.,  if  the  Servant- 
passages  are  post-exilic. 

(3)  The  use  of  Psalm  viii.  5  in  vii.  17  f.,  if  Psalm  viii. 
is  post-exilic,  as  Cheyne.^ 

(4)  Job  XV.  7  f.  is  said  to  be  clearly  dependent  on  Proverbs 
viii.  22  ff.,  especially  25.^ 

(5)  Elsewhere  Satan  only  occurs  in  post-exilic  literature.* 
Other  views  are  far  less  probable. 

(iii.)  The  ascription  to  Job  or  Moses,  or  Mosaic  or  pre- 
Mosaic  times  is  due  to  a  confusion  between  the  period  of  the 
patriarch  Job  and  of  the  author  of  the  book.  The  scene  being 
laid  in  Edom  in  patriarchal  times,  express  allusions  to  the 
law  and  literature  of  Israel  are  avoided,  and  God  is  usually 
spoken  of  as  Elohim;  but,  as  we  have  seen,  the  book 
constantly  betrays  acquaintance  with  the  ideas  and  cir- 
cumstances of  the  later  monarchy,  and  most  probably  of 
the  Exile.5 

(iv.)  The  age  of  Solomon  has  commended  itself  to  many 
scholars^  on  account  of  the  parallels  to  Davidic  Psalms,  and 
to  Proverbs  i.-ix.,  etc.,  supposed  by  them  to  be  Solomonic, 
and  the  alleged  dependence  of  Amos,  Isaiah,  and  other  pre- 
exilic  literature  on  Job.'^  But  the  Psalms  and  the  sections  in 
Proverbs  which  have  most  in  common  with  Job  are  probably 

1  Chevnk,  cf.  above,  Cornill,  c.  b.c.  250,  Duhm,  Kautzsch,  c. 
B.C.  332?,  Kayser-Marti,  p.  191,  between  Zechariah  and  Chronicles, 
Smend. 

2  Psalter y  201,  Baethgen,  about  the  time  of  the  Exile. 

^  So  Cornill,  who  regards  Prov.  i.-ix.,  q.v.^  as  late  post-exilic. 

*  Zech,  iii.  i  f.,  Ps.  cix.  6,  i.  Chron.  xxi.  i. 

"  For  the  value  of  the  Talmudic  statement  that  Moses  wrote  the 
"section  about  .  .  .  Job"  see  p.  8. 

«  Luther,  Delitzsch,  etc.,  ap.  Cornill. 

''  Cf.\Ji.%  f.,  Am.  iv.  13,  V.  8  ;  xii.  15,  Am.  ix.  6;  xviii.  16,  Am.  ii.  9; 
XXX.  31,  Am.  viii.  10;  xiv.  11,  Isa.  xix.  5. 


JOB  127 

post-exilic,  and,  in  the  case  of  the  other  parallels,  the  depen- 
dence, if  any,  is  as,  or  more  likely  to  be  on  the  side  of  Job. 

(v.)  A  date  about  the  time  of  Isaiah  is  suggested  by  the 
view  that  the  Captivity  which  forms  the  background  of  the 
book  is  that  of  Samaria.^  While  this  view  is  not  impossible, 
it  seems  disproved  by  the  arguments  for  an  exilic  or  post-exilic 
date. 

(c)  Integrity, — The  main  difficulties  arise  from  an  apparent 
inconsistency  between  the  different  parts  of  the  book.^ 

The  Prologue  supplies  an  explanation  of  Job's  sufferings— 
that  they  are  to  test  his  righteousness — which  does  not  seem 
to  harmonise  with  the  poems.^  On  the  whole,  however,  the 
poems  presuppose  the  Prologue.* 

The  Epilogue  seems  to  spoil  the  whole  book  by  re- 
habilitating the  very  doctrine  which  the  book  was  written 
to  disprove.  Job,  restored  to  health  and  prosperity,  and 
living  to  a  good  old  age,  would  have  been  a  triumphant 
example  of  the  doctrine  that,  sooner  or  later,  the  righteous 
were  rewarded  in  this  life.  Possibly,  however,  the  author  felt 
it  necessary  to  assert  the  final  bliss  of  the  righteous,  even  at 
the  cost  of  apparent  inconsistency.^ 

The  Elihu  speeches,  though  still  defended  by  some  dis- 
tinguished critics,^  are  generally  regarded  as  a  later  addition,^ 
intended  to  correct  what  was  regarded  as  the  undue  emphasis 
on  certain  aspects  of  truth.  Elihu  is  never  mentioned  else- 
where; no  notice  is  taken  of  his  argument  by  Job  or  by 
Jehovah;    his    speeches   interrupt    the    connection    between 

*  NoLDEKE,  Merx,  Hitzig,  Reuss,  Ewald,  under  Manasseh,  ap. 
Cornill. 

2  On  shorter  doubtful  passages  see  Contents /(W,y//w. 

3  Cf.  Teaching,  ii. 

*  The  Prologue  is  regarded  as  later  addition  by  Konig,  possibly  from  a 
prose  work  on  Job  j  but  is  accepted  by  most  critics.  Cheyne  is  doubtful, 
p.  66  f. 

5  Cheyne,  p.  69,  Epilogue  by  an  editor,  based  somewhat  carelessly 
on  the  Prologue.     Duhm  derives  both  from  an  ancient  popular  work. 

«  BuDDE,  Cornill. 

7  Baethgen,  Cheyne,  Driver  "all  but  certain,"  Dillmann,  Duhm, 
Konig,  Siegfried,  Strack,  etc. 


128  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Job's  appeal  to  the  Almighty,  xxxi.  35,  and  Jehovah's 
answer,  xxxviii.  i ;  although  his  contribution  is  not  mere 
repetition,  it  adds  hardly  anything  to  the  argument  against 
Job.  Dr.  A.  B.  Davidson  writes :  ^  "  The  difference " 
between  the  views  of  Elihu  and  those  of  the  three  friends 
"does  not  amount  to  much,  and  is  apt  to  be  exaggerated." 
"So  far  as  Elihu's  relation  to  the  three  friends  is  concerned, 
it  is  not  easy  to  find  any  great  difference  between  his  concep- 
tion and  theirs,  or  almost  any  difference  whatever  in  principle." 
The  style  of  the  Elihu  speeches  differs  in  many  ways  from, 
and  has  seemed  to  many  scholars  -  very  inferior  to,  that  of  the 
rest  of  the  book.  The  two  last  objections  might  be  met  by 
supposing  that  this  section  was  added  by  the  author  in  his 
later  years.^ 

The  speeches  of  Jehovah  have  been  doubted  as  a  whole,* 
but  unless  the  original  book  is  cut  down  to  the  speeches  of 
Job  and  his  friends,  the  utterances  of  Jehovah  seem  necessary 
to  the  plan  of  the  work.  The  descriptions  of  Behemoth  and 
Leviathan,  xl.  15-xli.,  are  more  often  regarded  as  additions; 
the  style  seems  inferior  to  that  of  xxxviii.  f.^ 

Duhm,  in  the  Kurzer  Handkommeniar,  ascribes  the  Prologue  and 
Epilogue  to  the  close  of  the  Monarchy  ;  the  discussion  between  Job  and 
his  friends  and  the  speeches  of  Jehovah  to  c.  500-450  ;  the  Elihu  speeches 
by  a  much  later  writer.     There  are  also  many  other  additions. 

(d)  Text. — The  obscurities  and  other  difficulties  of  the 
Hebrew  text,  and  the  fact  that  the  LXX.  text  is  very  different 
and  much  shorter,  indicate  that  many  glosses  and  corruptions 
have  crept  in.  Various  attempts  have  been  made  to  recon- 
struct the  original  readings  by  the  use  of  the  versions,  and  by 
the  application  of  theories  as  to  metre,  but  none  have  met 
with  much  acceptance.'' 

1  Pages  xliv.,  xlii.  '  Cheyne,  Renan,  ap.  Cheyne. 

5  Kamphausen  and  Merx,  ap.  Cornill. 
*  Cheyne,  p.  69. 

^  KoNiG,  Siegfried  ;  Driver  is  incHned  to  reject  xl.  15-24. 

6  The  most  important  are  Bickell,  Carmina  KTl,  tr.  in  Dillon's 
Sceptics  of  O.T.'y  BuDDE,  Hiob' ;  Merx,  Dcis  Gedicht  von  Hiob. ;  Sieg- 
fried, S.B.O.T, 


JOB  129 

(e)  Cofitenfs. — I.-II.,  Prologue. 

Satan  is  permitted  by  God  to  test  Job's  righteousness  by 
depriving  him  of  his  wealth  and  of  his  children,  and  by 
afflicting  him  with  a  loathsome  disease.  Job  remains  faithful. 
His  three  friends  come  to  comfort  him.^ 

III.-XXXL,  Job  and  his  Friends  Discuss  the  Problem 
OF  THE  Relation  of  Suffering  and  Sin. 

iii.  Job. — He  curses  the  day  of  his  birth  and  longs  for 
death.2 

iv.,  V.  Eliphaz. — Job's  complaint  seems  to  reproach  God; 
but,  in  any  issue  between  God  and  man,  man  must  be  in  the 
wrong.  Job,  being  human,  must  have  sinned.  His  calamities 
are  chastisements,  sent  for  his  good.  If  he  submits  and 
repents  he  will  be  restored  to  great  prosperity,  and  die  in 
a  good  old  age. 

vi.,  vii.  Job. — Renewed  complaint  and  prayer  for  death. 
Job  is  innocent,  his  friends  have  interpreted  him  harshly  and 
unfairly.  If  he  has  sinned,  let  God  remove  his  sin  and 
pardon  him. 

Siegfried  regards  vii.  i-io,  the  brevity  and  weariness  of  life,  as  editorial. 

viii.  Bildad. — God  deals  with  men  according  to  their  deserts; 
such  is  the  tradition  of  the  fathers.  Job's  sons  must  have 
perished  for  their  sins,  and  if  Job  were  righteous,  God  would 
restore  him  to  prosperity. 

ix.,  X.  Job. — Still  lamenting  and  longing  for  death.  Job  dis- 
claims any  controversy  with  God,  he  is  too  helpless  in  spite  of 
his  innocence.  But,  as  a  fact,  God  does  not  deal  with  men 
according  to  their  deserts ;  good  and  bad  alike  suffer,  or  God 
"  shines  on  the  counsel  of  the  wicked."  Job  appeals  to  Him 
to  explain  the  mystery. 

xi.  Zophar. — Would  that  God  would  make  Job  see  his  sins, 
as  God  sees  them.  Job  is  really  suffering  less  than  he  de- 
serves.    Prosperity  will  follow  repentance. 

xii.-xiv.  Job. — He  claims  to  be  as  wise  as  his  friends,  their 
traditional  doctrines  are  either  commonplaces  or  "  maxims  of 
ashes."    The  wicked  prosper,  the  righteous  suffer.     Let  God 
1  Cf,  p.  127.  2  ^  jer.  XX.  14-18. 

K 


130  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

meet  him  as  an  equal,  and  convince  him  of  sin.     If  there 

were  any  prospect  of  vindication  and  renewed  happiness,  he 

would  wait  patiently  for  it,  even  in  Sheol,  if  compensation  in  a 

future  life  were  possible.^ 

Siegfried  treats  xii.  4-xiii.  i,  God's  power  in  Nature  and  Providence, 
as  editorial ;  xiii.  2  connects  closely  with  xii,  3  ;  xii.  9-12,  which  seem  to 
confirm  Zophar's  estimate  of  traditional  wisdom,  are  also  omitted  by 
Cornill. 

Siegfried  also  regards  xiv.  i  f.,  xiii.  28,  xiv.  5,  7-12,  14,  18-22  (a  didactic 
poem  on  the  brevity  and  misery  of  life,  and  the  certainty  of  death,  parallel 
to  vii.  i-io),  as  a  later  addition. 

XV.  Eliphaz. — Job's  arguments  are  blasphemous  quibbles, 
most  discourteous  to  older  and  wiser  men.  All  are  guilty 
before  God.  By  a  detailed  picture  E.  shows  that  the  wicked 
do  not  prosper,  but  suffer  calamity,  and  perish  miserably. 

xvi.,  xvii.  Job. — Condemned  by  God  and  man,  Job  protests 
that  he  is  an  innocent  man  delivered  up  to  the  wicked.  He 
must  die,  but  he  has  a  witness  in  heaven.  God  knows  his 
innocence.  His  sufferings  are  a  marvel  to  the  righteous,  who 
yet  persevere,  like  Job  himself.  His  only  hope  is  in  death — a 
barren  hope. 

xviii.  Bildad. — Calamity  dogs  the  steps  of  the  sinner;  his 
name  and  family  are  cut  off  (like  Job). 

xix.  Job. — Overwhelmed  by  God's  wrath,  forsaken  and 
despised  by  God  and  man,  Job  appeals  to  his  friends  for  pity. 
Yet  he  is  confident  that,  even  after  death,  his  Vindicator  2 
(God)  will  establish  his  innocence,  and  he  will  see  God,  i.e.^  be 
restored  to  happy  fellowship  with  Him,  25-27. 

For  a  discussion  of  the  very  obscure  passage,  25-27,  see  Davidson's 
Joby  C.B.S.  291  fF.  The  Hebrew  Text,  as  it  stands,  has,  by  the  application 
of  somewhat  unfair  pressure,  been  interpreted  to  mean  that  Job  expects  to 
be  vindicated  by  God  and  restored  to  His  favour  before  death.  Cf.  the 
alternative  renderings:  "I  shall  see  God— in  my  flesh,"  A.V.,  "from 
my  flesh,"  R.V.,  "without  my  flesh,"  R.V.  Mg.  Siegfried  obtains  from 
LXX.,  etc.  a  reconstruction  of  the  text,  which  makes  the  reference  to 
a  resurrection  definite  and  certain,  but  he  regards  the  passage  as  a  later 
addition.  Cheyne,  Origin  of  Psalter^  442,  regards  the  text  of  the  passage 
as  corrupt. 

XX.  Zophar. — If  the  sinner  prospers,  it  is  only  for  a  time; 

he  is  quickly  overtaken  by  misery  and  shame  (like  Job). 

1  xiv.  13-15.     R.V.  8  Go'eL 


JOB  131 

xxi.  Job. — Not  so ;  is  it  indeed  the  rule  that  calamity  and 

sudden  death  overtake  the  sinner,  16-18?     Far  from  it;  the 

wicked  live  prosperously  to  a  good  old  age;   they  see  the 

prosperity  of  their  children  ;  they  are  honourably  buried ;  and 

men  honour  them  both  in  life  and  after  death.    If  their  children 

suffer,  what  is  that  to  them  ? 

A.V.  takes  16-18  as  a  statement;  "it  is  the  rule."  But  this  contradicts 
the  argument  of  the  context.  Siegfried  also  takes  it  as  a  statement, 
and  regards  it  as  an  interpolation. 

xxii.  Eliphaz. — God  cannot  afflict  for  selfish  ends  of  His 

own,  but  only  in  the  interests  of  justice.     Sin  must  be  the 

reason  of  Job's  sufferings,  doubtless  the  cruelty  and  oppression, 

for  which  Job's  wealth  and  power  would  give  him  opportunity. 

Let  him  repent,  amend,  and  prosper. 

Hitherto  Job's  guilt  has  only  been  implied,  now  he  is  expressly  charged 
with  specified  crimes. 

xxiii.,  xxiv.  Job. — He  longs  for  access  to  God,  that  he  may 

prove  his  innocence,  and  learn  the  reason  of  God's  dealings, 

and  why,  in  spite  of  his  innocence,  he  is  afflicted  as  by  a 

blind  Fate.     In  the  world,  might  and  fraud  reign,  the  poor  are 

oppressed  by  the  rich,  the  workers  by  their  employers.     Crime 

is  rampant,  and  the  wrongdoer  goes  unpunished  till  he  dies, 

like  other  men. 

xxiv.  18-21,  the  doom  of  the  wicked,  are  supposed  to  be  a  state- 
ment, by  Job,  of  the  views  he  is  refuting.  Siegfried  regards  13-21 
as  an  addition. 

XXV.  Bildad, — What  is  sinful  man  before  God  ? 

xxvi.-xxxi.  Job.  xxvi.  i-xxvii.  6. — Job  acknowledges  the 
infinite  power  of  God,  and  again  protests  his  innocence. 

xxvii.   7-23. — The  inevitable  doom  of  the  wicked  and  his 

family. 

As  this  passage  expressly  contradicts  Job's  main  position,  it  is  probably 
not  part  of  his  speech.  Its  teaching  is  that  of  Job's  friends,  and  it  may  be 
altogether  or  in  part  either  a  misplaced  speech  of  Zophar,^  who  has  no 
speech  in  the  third  set,  or  a  later  addition.  ^ 

^  Cnwi'SVL,  Job  and  Solomon,  38,  114. 

*  KoNiG,  Siegfried,  Smend,  Strack,  etc.  Budde  and  Cornill 
defend  the  originality  of  the  ascription  to  Job,  and  explain  thus :  As 
the  friends  know  so  well  the  fate  of  the  sinner,  let  them  take  warning, 
for  they  are  behaving  wickedly. 


132  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

xxviii, — A  didactic  poem  in  praise  of  Wisdom. 

The  earliest  or,  at  any  rate,  the  most  primitive  of  the  great  O.T. 
passages  on  Wisdom.  As  yet,  Wisdom  is  not  personified.  It  is  com- 
monly explained  as  a  further  illustration  by  Job  of  the  mystery  of 
God's  ways,  but  its  calm,  didactic  tone  is  out  of  place  at  the  crisis 
of  his  agony,  and  it  is  probably  a  later  addition,^  perhaps  an  independent 
poem  inserted  here  to  secure  its  preservation.^ 

xxix.-xxxi.  Job. — He  meets  the  definite  accusations  of 
Eliphaz  in  xxii.  by  a  detailed  statement  of  the  innocence 
and  benevolence  of  his  prosperous  life,  which  he  contrasts 
with  his  present  misery. 

XXXII.-XXXVIL,  The  Elihu  Speeches. 

Job's  friends  having  been  silenced,  Elihu,  a  younger  man, 
comes  forward  to  set  both  parties  right,  to  refute  Job  by  argu- 
ing the  friends'  case  more  efficiently  than  they  have  done 
themselves;  or,  as  we  might  say,  modern  thought  comes  to  the 
rescue  of  traditional  wisdom.  His  contribution,  however, 
is  substantially  a  repetition  of  the  friends'  speeches.  He 
asserts  that  suffering  is  due  to  sin,  and  that  Job  is  presump- 
tuous in  questioning  God's  doings.  The  special  features  of 
his  speeches  are  (i.)  his  reply  to  Job's  complaint  that  God 
does  not  answer  him ;  God  speaks  to  men  in  dreams  and  by 
angels,^  or  prayer  (as  in  Job's  case)  is  left  unanswered,  because 
of  the  pride  of  man*;  (ii.)  the  stress  laid  on  the  discipHnary 
value  of  suffering.^  The  concluding  picture  of  the  majesty  of 
God,  partly  anticipates  the  speeches  of  Jehovah.^ 

XXXVIII.  i-XLII.  6,  The  Speeches  of  Jehovah  and 
Job's  Submission. 

Jehovah  shows  that  Job  had  spoken  presumptuously,  by 
describing  His  wonderful  works  in  Nature,  especially  the  horse, 
the  hippopotamus  {behemoth)^  and  the  crocodile  (leviathan). 
Job  acknowledges  his  presumption.^ 

*  DuHM,  Siegfried,  Smend,  A.T.  Theol,  508. 

2  Similarly  CHEYNE.yi?^,  etc.,  94.  But  Budde  and  Cornill  defend  the 
passive.  The  author  of  Job  may  have  written  xxviii.  independently, 
and  have  sacrificed  dramatic  eflfect  to  his  desire  to  use  the  poem  as  an 
illustrative  parallel;  but  it  can  hardly  have  been  written  as  an  integral  part 
of  the  book.  ^  xxxiii.  14-23.  *  xxxv.  12. 

»  xxxiii.  14  ff.,  xxxvi.  7  ff.,  cf.  v.  17  ff.       ^  Cf.  p.  127.       '  Cf.  p.  128. 


JOB  133 

XLII.  7-17,  Epilogue. 

Jehovah  declares  that  the  friends  "  have  not  spoken  of  me 
the  thing  that  is  right,  as  my  servant  Job  hath,"  but  they  may 
be  forgiven,  if  Job  prays  for  them.  Job  is  restored  to  health, 
and  to  greater  prosperity  than  that  which  he  formerly  en- 
joyed.^ 

(f)  Teaching. — The  main  subject  of  the  book  is  the  relation 
of  suffering  and  sin.  According  to  popular  Jewish  theology, 
all  suffering  was  punishment;  a  righteous  moral  government 
of  the  world  was  fully  manifested  in  the  present  life;  happi- 
ness and  prosperity,  loss  and  suffering  were  meted  out  in 
exact  proportion  to  men's  virtues  and  vices.  This  doctrine  is 
denied  (i.)  by  the  picture  of  an  exceptionally  good  man, 
beggared  and  bereaved,  tortured  by  loathsome  disease;  (ii.) 
by  Job's  description  of  the  prevalence  in  the  world  of  un- 
merited suffering  and  unpunished  sin,  by  the  friends'  failure 
to  prove  him  mistaken,  and  by  the  explicit  statement  of  God 
that  Job  is  right  and  the  friends  wrong. 

This  denial  of  the  popular  doctrine  leaves  us  face  to  face 
with  the  problem  of  the  compatibility  of  evil  and  suffering 
with  the  Divine  Righteousness.  It  is  not  clear  what  solution, 
if  any,  the  author  proposes. 

(i.)  The  Speeches  of  Jehovah  suggest  that  we  are  to  regard 
the  problem  as  an  insoluble  mystery.  If  we  cannot  under- 
stand God  in  Nature,  we  must  be  still  more  incapable  of 
fathoming  the  mysteries  of  His  moral  government  of  His 
creatures.  Job's  speeches,  however,  lead  us  to  expect  some- 
thing more  practically  useful. 

(ii.)  The  Prologue  explains  Job's  sufferings  as  a  test  of  his 
righteousness.  Assuming  that  the  Prologue  is  by  the  author 
of  the  poem,  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  this  is  put  forward  as 
an  adequate  explanation  of  the  unmerited  suffering  of  the 
world.  The  author  might  perhaps  intend  to  illustrate  one 
way  in  which  a  good  man's  sufferings  might  be  explained  with- 
out supposing  him  guilty  of  secret  sin. 

(iii.)  Job  expresses  a  desperate  hope*  that  his  innocence 

*  Cf,  p.  127.  2  xiv.  13  ff.,  xvii.  13  ff.,  xix.  25  ff.,  cf.  Contents. 


134  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

may  be  vindicated  and  he  restored  to  happy  fellowship  with 
God  in  a  future  life.  The  author  may  have  intended  to 
suggest  that  the  solution  might  possibly  be  looked  for  in 
that  direction,  but  compensation  in  a  future  life  is  only  a 
possible  hope,  not  a  certain  conclusion. 

(iv.)  Job's  piety  and  fortitude  in  his  affliction — he  denies 
that  God's  righteousness  is  manifested,  but  always  believes 
Him  righteous — are  doubtless  intended  for  an  example.^ 

(v.)  The  literary  power  of  the  book  suggests  that  the  author 
has  not  merely  worked  out  a  didactic  theme,  but  has  rather 
depicted  the  tragic  consequences  of  the  popular  doctrine  of 
retribution,  using  the  deeper  mysteries  of  evil,  of  Nature,  and 
Providence,  to  illustrate  his  main  subject.  The  author's  pre- 
meditated intention  to  teach  may  not  go  beyond  the  denial  of 
exact  retribution  in  this  life. 

Hebrew  theology  was  primarily  concerned  with  the  nation ; 
doubtless  the  Book  of  Job  shows  us  the  difficulties  in  which 
this  theology  was  involved  when  it  turned  from  the  nation  to 
the  individual.  But,  without  regarding  Job  as  a  mere  per- 
sonification of  Israel,  we  may  suppose  that  the  sufferings  of 
the  restored  Jews,  in  the  days  of  their  devoted  adherence  to 
the  Law,  raised  difficulties  as  to  the  old  doctrine  of  retribu- 
tion, even  as  applied  to  the  nation.  The  author  probably  has 
the  nation  in  mind,  as  well  as  the  fate  of  the  individual. 

(g)  Use  in  N.  T. — It  is  remarkable  how  little  use  is  made  of 
this  book  in  N.T.  "  The  patience  of  Job  "  is  mentioned  in 
James  v.  ii,  and  there  are  a  few  parallels,  which  might  be 
coincidences.^  Apart  from  these,  the  only  quotation  is  v.  13 
in  i.  Corinthians  iii.  19,  "For  it  is  written.  He  that  taketh  the 
wise  in  their  craftiness."  But  for  this  last  it  would  be  possible 
to  argue  that  the  N.T.  writers  were  not  acquainted  with  the 
Book  of  Job. 

2.  Psalms. 

(a)  The  Arrangement  of  the  Psalter. — The  following  table 
shows  the  arrangement  of  the  Psalter  in  the  Hebrew  Text  and 

*  Davidson,  xxvi. 

*  Phil.  i.  19a,  however,  is  identical  with  Job  xiii.  i6a,  LXX, 


PSALMS  135 

in  the  Septuagint.  In  both  it  is  arranged  in  five  books,  each 
concluding  with  a  doxology.  The  difference  of  numbering 
in  the  two  texts  is  due  to  the  fact  that  in  four  instances  a 
single  psalm  in  one  text  forms  two  in  the  other,  thus : — 

Hebrew,  ix.  +  x.  =  LXX.,  ix. 
„  cxiv.  +  cxv.  =     „       cxiii. 
„  cxvi.  =     „       cxiv.  +  cxv. 

„  cxlvii.  =     „       cxlvi.  +  cxlvii. 

The  LXX.  contains  an  additional  psalm,  purporting  to  be 
written  by  David,  in  the  first  person,  to  celebrate  his  victory 
over  Goliath. 

In  the  table  the  numbers  showing  the  frequency  of 
occurrence  of  the  Divine  Names  are  taken  from  Lowe 
and  Jennings  on  the  Psalms  I.  xxvii. ;  they  exclude  cases 
where  Elohim  occurs  in  phrases  which  do  not  admit  of  the 
use  of  Jehovah,  e.g,^  "thy  God." 

The  names,  etc.  to  the  left  hand  are  the  names  of  persons, 
apparently  authors,  mentioned  in  the  titles.  The  figures  in 
italics  refer  to  the  LXX.,  and  the  names  in  italics  are  names 
occurring  only  in  the  LXX.,  either  in  that  particular  book 
or  part  of  a  book,  or  in  the  Psalter  as  a  whole.  Where  the 
number  of  a  psalm  occurs  against  two  different  names,  the 
title,  mostly  in  LXX.,  gives  both  names. 

Book  I.    1-41,  1-J^O. 
Jehovistic,  Jehovah  272,  Elohim  15. 


Anonymous 

1,2 
1,2 

10 

33 

David 

3-8,9 

11-32 

34-41 

S-8,9 

10-31 

32 

55-40 

Book  II.    42-72,  Jtl-71. 

Elohistic,  Jehovah  30,  Elohim  164. 

Anonymous  43  66,67  7i 

65 
David  51-65  68-70 

1,2  50-64  66,67-69    70 


136  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Book  II. — continued. 

Sons  of  Korah    42  44-49 

Itl  Ji2-Ji8 

Asaph  50 

Jfi 
Solomon  72 

71 

Sons  of  Jonadab  and  \  -^ 

of  the  first  captives     f 

The  concluding  doxology  is  followed  by  a  subscription :  "  The  prayers 
of  David  the  son  of  Jesse  are  ended." 

Book  III.    73-89,  72-88. 

Psalms  73-83  are  Elohistic,  84-89  Jehovistic. 

David  86 

85 
Sons  of  Korah  84, 85  87, 88 

83, 84  86, 87 

Asaph  73-83 

72-82 
Ethan  89 

88 
Jeduthun  jy 

76 
Heman  87 

Book  IV.    90-106,  89-105.    Jehovistic. 

Anonymous  9^92,93-99,100  102  104,105,106 

91  99  101  104,105 

David  loi  103 

90        92-98  100  102,103 

Moses  90 

89 

Book  V.     107-150,  106-151. 

Jehovistic,  except  that  cviii.  =  Ivii.  7-11  +lx.  5-12  is  Elohistic, 
and  Elohim  is  used  absolutely  in  cxliv.  9. 

Anonymous      107  111-121  123  125,126 

106  110-120, 121, 122  124, 125, 126 

David  108-110  122  124 

107-109  123 

Solomon  127 


PSALMS 

137 

Book  V .—continued. 

Anonymous 

128-130 
127-129 

132        134-136,137 

131          133-135 

David 

131               133 

130              132 

138-145 
136, 137-144 

Anonymous 
David 

146 

147              148,  149, 150 

151 

Haggai  and 
Zechariah 

}« 

U6, 147, 148      149, 150 

Psalms  120-134  have  the  title  "Song  of  Ascents,"  and 
Psalms  135, 146-150  begin  and  end  with  "Praise  ye  the  Lord," 
"  Hallelujah." 

(b)  The  Growth  of  the  Psalter. — The  table  in  §  i  contains 
the  chief  data  for  determining  the  history  of  the  Psalter.  Our 
Psalter  is  the  final  edition  of  the  canonical  Temple  hymn- 
book;  other  collections  of  hymns  may  have  been  used  at 
the  Temple  later  on,  but  they  were  not  combined  with  the 
Psalter.  Such  a  national  collection  of  sacred  song  must  have 
connected  with  individual  psalms  through  a  series  of  earlier 
and  shorter  collections.  The  compiler  of  a  hymn-book 
may  either  rearrange  earlier  collections  according  to  some 
principle,  authorship,  subject,  metre,  etc.,  or  he  may  simply 
combine  previous  collections;  or  he  may  partly  follow  one 
method,  and  partly  the  other.  In  most  modern  hymn- 
books  the  hymns  are  arranged  according  to  subjects,  and 
afford  no  evidence  of  the  history  of  previous  collections 
from  which  the  hymns  are  derived.  But  sometimes  a 
supplement  is  added  without  altering  the  arrangement  of 
the  earlier  collection,  e.g.,  two  or  three  such  supplements 
have  been  added  to  Sankey's  Hymn-book,  and  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  latest  edition  reveals  the  history  of  the  gradual 
growth  of  the  book  to  its  present  form. 

Similarly  the  present  arrangement  of  the  contents  of  the 
Psalter  shows  that  the  Psalter  is  the  result  of  a  process  of 
aggregation,  by  which  earlier  collections  were  combined  and 
supplemented,  without  any  extensive  rearrangement  of  their 
contents. 


138  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

The  Psalter  is  not  arranged  according  to  authorship  as 
indicated  in  the  titles,  for  the  Davidic  psalms  are  distributed 
through  the  five  books ;  nor  according  to  subject  matter,  for 
psalms  on  similar  topics  are  often  found  far  apart,  separated 
by  others  which  deal  with  very  different  topics.  An  attempt 
has  sometimes  been  made  to  show  that  the  present  arrange- 
ment is,  in  a  fashion,  based  upon  subject  matter;  but  its 
advocates  often  rely  on  mechanical  similarity  of  diction, 
e.g.y  xxxiv.  and  xxxv.  have  been  supposed  to  be  placed 
together  because  they  are  the  only  psalms  which  mention 
the  Angel  of  the  Lord.  It  is  much  more  likely  that  these 
psalms  were  found  side  by  side  in  an  earlier  collection,  and 
the  similarity  is  due  to  their  composition  by  the  same  author 
or  during  the  same  period. 

We  may  therefore  examine  the  present  arrangement  of  the 
Psalter  to  see  what  evidence  it  affords  of  its  growth  from  earlier 
collections. 

The  fact  that  the  Jehovistic  psalms  are  not  all  in  one 
collection,  nor  all  the  Elohistic  all  in  another,  shows  that 
the  present  grouping  has  not  been  arranged  by  a  final  editor 
according  to  the  Divine  Names,  but  has  been  taken  over 
by  him  from  earlier  collections.  Hence  we  may  conclude 
that  Book  I.,  Book  II.,  Ixxiii.-lxxxiii.,  Ixxiv.-lxxxix.,  Book 
IV.  +  Book  V.  are  earlier  collections.^ 

Hence,  again,  the  books  are  not  wholly,  at  any  rate, 
divisions  made  by  the  final  editor,  but  correspond  to  earlier 
collections. 

The  Elohistic  character  of  Book  II.  and  of  Ixxiii.-lxxxiii.  is 
due  to  an  editor;  the  Jehovistic  psalms  xiv.,  xl.  13-17  are 
found  in  II.  and  III.  as  liii.  and  Ixx.  with  Jehovah  changed 
to  Elohim ;  such  phrases  as  "  God  thy  God,"  "  Elohim 
Sabaoth,"  i.e.^  "God  Sabaoth,"  are  obtained  by  altering  the 
Jehovah  in  "Jehovah  thy  God,"  "Jehovah  Sabaoth"  to 
Elohim.     Since,  however,  this  Elohistic  editor  did  not  venture 

^  They  may  have  been  modified  by  addition,  omission,  etc.  The 
reasons  for  combining  IV.  and  V.  and  for  separating  Ixxiv.-btxxix. 
from  them  will  appear  later. 


PSALMS  139 

to  make  a  similar  revision  of  Book  I.  as  a  whole,  the  latter 
must  have  been  already  firmly  established. 

The  Elohistic  section  II. +  lxxiii.-lxxxiii.  is  plainly  a  com- 
bination of  three  smaller  collections :  (i.)  a  Davidic  hymn- 
book,  li.-lxxii.,  to  which  the  doxology,  and  the  subscription, 
"  The  prayers  of  David,  the  son  of  Jesse,  are  ended,"  originally 
belonged ;  (ii.)  the  hymn-book  of  the  Korahite  temple  choir, 
xlii.-xlix. ;  (iii.)  the  hymn-book  of  the  Asaphite  temple  choir, 
1.,  Ixxiii.-lxxxiii.  (i.)  is  probably  the  oldest  of  these  collections. 

The  Jehovistic  appendix,  Ixxxiv.-lxxxix.,  is  a  later  Korahite 
hymn-book. 

Books  IV.  and  V.  are  very  similar,  and  there  is  no  reason 
for  a  division  at  cvi.,  since  cvii.  is  the  sequel  to  cvi.     Hence 

IV.  and  V.  were  one  collection,  and  the  doxology  at  the 
end  of  cvi.  cannot  be,  like  the  other  doxologies,  the  con- 
clusion of  an  earlier  collection.  The  different  Divine  Names 
show  that  IV.  and  V.  were  not  edited  by  the  editor  of  II. ; 
the  subscription  to  II.,  "the  prayers  of  David  are  ended," 
shows  that  that  editor  was  not  acquainted  with  IV.  and  V., 
in  which  several  psalms  are  ascribed  to  David.^  Moreover 
cviii.  is  made  up  of  sections  of  two  Elohistic  psalms,  and 
retains  the  editorial  Elohim,  hence   the   editor  of  IV.  and 

V.  or  one  of  his  predecessors  was  acquainted  with  the 
Elohistic  collection.  On  these  and  other  grounds  IV.  and 
V.  are  later  than  II.  and  III. 

The  absolute  date  of  these  collections  is  difficult  to  fix ;  the 
most  probable  conclusions  are  as  follows.  In  I.,  i.,  ii.,  anony- 
mous both  in  LXX.  and  Hebrew,  were  prefixed  by  the  final 
editor  as  a  suitable  introduction  to  the  complete  Psalter.  The 
Davidic  group,  iii.-xli.  is  the  earliest  Temple  hymn-book. 
The  literary  parallels  in  some  of  the  Psalms  suggest  that  the 
collection  was  made  after  the  Exile, ^  perhaps  in  connection  with 
the  organisation  of  the  Temple  services  by  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.^ 

1  Unless  indeed  all  these  titles  were  added  after  the  collection  IV.  +V, 
was  compiled. 

2  Individual  psalms,  of  course,  may  be  much  earlier. 

'  Robertson  Smith,  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church,  2nd 
edition,  p.  221. 


140  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

The  Elohistic  section,  as  later  than  I.,  will  also  be  later  than 
Nehemiah,  a  conclusion  supported  by  the  fact  that  in  Nehe- 
miah  vii.  44  there  is  only  one  Temple  choir,  the  sons  of 
Asaph,^  whereas  before  the  compilation  of  this  section,  the 
Korahite  choir  had  been  formed.  On  the  other  hand,  this 
section  was  compiled  before  the  time  of  the  Chronicler,  300- 
250,  for  Chronicles  names  three  choirs,  Asaph,  Heman,  and 
Ethan  or  Jeduthun.^ 

The  Jehovistic  appendix.,  Ixxxiv.-lxxxix.,  to  II.  and  III.,  is 
somewhat  nearer  to  the  Chronicler.  It  marks  the  transition 
from  Korah  to  Heman  and  Ethan,  by  combining  Korahite 
psalms  with  one  headed  Ethan,  and  another,  in  LXX., 
Heman.^ 

Hence  IV.  and  V.  are  later  than  the  Chronicler.  The 
presence  in  them  of  Maccabsean  psalms  indicates  a  date  in 
that  period. 

The  history  of  the  Psalter  may  therefore  be  summarised 
thus : — 

(i.)  It  includes  very  early  material,  but  no  date  can  be  fixed, 
even  approximately,  as  that  at  which  the  most  ancient  elements 
of  the  Psalter  were  composed.  But  the  stages  of  its  compila- 
tion which  we  are  able  to  trace  belong  to  the  period  after  the 
Exile. 

(ii.)  The  earliest  collection  is  the  Davidic  hymn-book,  iii.- 
xli,,  compiled  about  the  time  of  Nehemiah. 

(iii.)  Later  on,  three  other  collections  were  formed,  another 
with  the  title  David,  and  two  belonging  to  the  Temple  choirs, 
Asaph  and  Korah.  These  three  were  combined  by  an  Elo- 
histic editor. 

(iv.)  Another  Korahite  collection  was  made,  and  added  to 
the  Elohistic  section. 

^  Neh.  xi.  is  not  part  of  Nehemiah's  Memoirs,  but  only  based  upon 
them  ;  the  threefold  division  in  xi.  1 7,  is  not  found  in  the  LXX. 

2  i.  Chron.  vi.  31  ff.,  xxv.  i.  The  Chronicler  describes  the  past  in 
terms  of  the  institutions  of  his  own  times. 

^  If  these  positions  are  correct,  the  "  Jeduthun"  of  Ixxii.,  Heb.  and 
LXX.,  may  be  a  later  insertion. 


PSALMS  141 

(v.)  The  collection  IV.  4- V.  was  made,  also  from  earlier 
collections,  cxx.-cxxxiv.,  cxlvi.-cl,  etc. 

(vi.)  The  final  editor  combined  I.,  II.  +  III.,  and  IV. +  V. ; 
and  prefixed  i.,  ii.,  not  later  than  about  B.C.  132  (the  date  of 
the  Prologue  to  Ecclesiasticus). 

This  view  of  the  growth  of  the  Psalter,  and  the  arguments 
by  which  it  is  sustained,  are  substantially  those  of  Robertson 
Smith.i  We  can  only  notice  four  of  the  objections  to  this 
view ;  only  the  third  and  fourth  are  serious. 

(i.)  That  the  Canon  was  closed  in  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  I. 
But  the  weight  of  evidence,  both  internal  and  external,  is 
decisively  against  this  view.  Josephus  seems  to  have  held 
some  such  theory  2;  but  his  view  is  merely  a  deduction  from 
insufficient  and  misunderstood  data.  We  also  read  in  ii. 
Maccabees  ii.  13,^  that  Nehemiah  established  a  library  con- 
taining "  books  concerning  the  kings  and  prophets,  and  those 
of  David,  and  kings'  letters  concerning  offerings,"  but  this 
does  not  show  that  the  Canon  or  the  Psalter  were  closed  in 
Nehemiah's  time.^  Moreover,  ii.  Maccabees  is  a  very  doubt- 
ful authority.  The  fact  that  the  Samaritans  only  received  the 
Pentateuch  makes  it  improbable  that  the  full  O.T.  Canon  had 
been  authoritatively  established  in  Nehemiah's  time. 

(ii.)  The  translator  of  Ecclesiasticus,  writing  in  B.C.  132, 
refers  to  a  Greek  translation  of  "the  Law,  the  Prophecies, 
and  the  rest  of  the  books."  The  third  class  probably  includes 
the  Psalter,  and  it  has  been  argued  that  if  the  Psalter  was 
translated  into  Greek  in  132,  it  must  have  been  completed  a 
a  much  earlier  date.  But  collections  of  psalms  may  have 
been  translated  into  Greek  long  before  the  Psalter  was  com- 
pleted. The  Greek  editions  of  Daniel  and  Esther  were 
supplemented  after  they  had  been  translated,  even  without 

1  Op.  cit.  Lect.  vii.,  similarly  Cornill.  Cheyne  holds  that  the 
Psalter  was  completed  before  B.C.  142,  and  that  the  collections  II.  +  III., 
IV.  +  v.,  were  both  formed  in  the  Maccabcean  period.  Cornill  thinks 
the  Elohistic  section  received  its  Elohistic  revision  some  time  after  the 
collection  was  formed. 

2  Against  Apion,  i.  8.  ^  Probably  written  before  a.d.  70. 
*  Buhl,  English  Trans.,  10. 


142  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

any  Hebrew  authority  for  the  additions ;  a  fortiori  the  Greek 
edition  of  the  national  hymn-book  would  be  readily  enlarged 
to  conform  with  the  latest  Hebrew  edition. 

(iii.)  We  have  seen  that  the  doxology,  cvi.  47  f.,  at  the  close 
of  IV.,  was  added  by  the  final  editor;  but  in  i.  Chronicles 
xvi.  8-36,  we  find  a  psalm  made  up  of  cv.  1-15,  xcvi.  i,  etc., 
and  cvi.  i,  47  f.  This  acquaintance  of  the  Chronicler  with 
the  doxology  seems  to  show  that  the  Psalter  was  completed 
before  he  wrote.  Numerous  answers  have  been  given  to  this 
objection ;  (a)  that  the  doxology  was  a  part  of  the  psalm  as 
an  independent  poem^;  this  is  not  likely;  (b)  that  the 
doxology  was  composed  by  the  Chronicler,  and  borrowed  by 
the  editor  of  the  Psalter  2;  (c)  that  i.  Chronicles  xvi.  8-36, 
is  a  very  late  addition  to  Chronicles. 

(iv.)  If,  as  Gratz  and  Cheyne  maintain,  Maccabaean  psalms 
are  found  in  all  the  sections  of  the  Psalter,  either  the  collec- 
tions are  more  recent,  or  the  editors  have  interfered  with  them 
much  more  extensively  than  Robertson  Smith  supposed. ^ 

The  last  two  objections  suggest,  as  an  alternative  theory, 
that  the  stages  of  the  growth  of  the  Psalter  were  as  given 
above,  but  that  a  Psalter  in  five  books  was  compiled  before 
Chronicles,  i.e.^  c.  300,  and  that  later  additions  were  freely 
inserted  at  such  points  as  seemed  suitable. 

(c)  Date  and  Authorship  of  Individual  Psalms. — We  have 
three  kinds  of  evidence :  titles,  position  in  the  Psalter,  internal 
evidence.  For  the  titles  see  (d),  where  it  is  maintained  that 
they  afford  us  little  help.  For  position  in  the  Psalter,  see  (a) ; 
we  may  be  able  to  say  that  certain  psalms  are  older  than 
Nehemiah,  and  that  all  are  older  than  B.C.  132,  but  cannot  be 
much  more  definite.  The  internal  evidence  as  to  pre-exilic, 
Davidic,  and  Maccabaean  psalms  is  considered  in  (d),  (e); 
otherwise  internal  evidence  does  not  carry  us  far.  Many  of 
the  Psalms  are  short  devotional  poems,  presupposing  no  special 

1  Robertson  Smith,  O.T.,  etc.,  196. 

*  CoRNiLL,  p.  225.  Similarly,  Cheyne  suggests  that  the  doxology  was 
one  in  use  at  the  Temple  services,  and  therefore  known  alike  to  the 
Chronicler  and  the  editor  of  the  Psalter. 

'  Cf,  (e)  Maccabaean  Psalms. 


PSALMS  143 

historical  situation,  expressing  sentiments  common  to  devout 
believers  in  all  ages,  written  in  a  style  which — allowing  for  the 
editing  inevitable  in  a  hymn-book  in  current  use,  and  for  the 
imitation  of  older  styles  by  late  scholars — might  be  used  at 
any  time  from  Isaiah  to  the  Maccabees. 

The  history  of  the  Psalter  renders  it  probable  that  a  very  large 
proportion  of  the  Psalms,  especially  in  II.-V.,  are  post-exilic, 
and  that  many  in  11.  and  III.  belong  to  the  period  of  Nehe- 
miah  or  somewhat  later,  and  that  most  of  the  contents  of  IV. 
and  V.  are  later  still.  The  contents  of  many  of  the  Psalms 
confirm  such  conclusions ;  they  express  the  anxious  piety  of  a 
poor  and  suffering  people  whose  main  interest  is  the  Temple 
and  the  Law. 

(d)  The  Titles^  Davidic  and  pre-Exilic  Psalms. — In  attempt- 
ing to  use  the  titles  as  evidence  for  authorship,  we  meet  with 
many  difficulties.  Probably  the  oldest  titles  did  not  originally 
denote  authorship.  Apparently  the  "  David," ^  "Asaph," 
"Korah"  psalms  are  taken  from  collections  bearing  those 
titles.  When  the  smaller  collections  were  merged  in  larger 
ones,  the  origin  of  the  individual  psalms  was  shown  by  pre- 
fixing the  title  of  the  collection  to  each  psalm  taken  from  it. 
But  the  titles  "  Asaph,"  "  Korah "  probably  meant  that  the 
collections  were  the  hymn-books  of  these  choirs.  So  the  title 
"  David  "  given  to  iii.-xH.,  li.-lxxii.,  doubtless  indicates  some 
connection  with  David  or  his  dynasty,  but  not  necessarily 
authorship  by  David. 

In  most  of  the  Davidic  psalms,  the  internal  evidence,  as  far 
as  it  goes,  is  unfavourable  to  Davidic  authorship;  and,  with 
the  exception  of  xviii.,  never  amounts  to  anything  like  a  proof 
of  authorship  by  David.  The  notes  of  time,  place,  and 
circumstance,  where  there  are  any,  do  not  point  to  David 
or  his  times,  and  the  contents  do  not  suggest  the  David  of 
the  Book  of  Samuel.  As  to  style,  before  we  can  apply  this 
criterion,  we  must  have  a  fairly  large  group  of  psalms, 
certainly  David's,  before  we  know  what  his  style  was.     We 

^  i.e.y  iii.-xli.,  li.-lxxii.  ;  the  case  is  different  with  the  other  Davidic 
psalms.     N.B.— In  the  title  of  xxxiv.,  Abimelech  is  a  mistake  for  Achish. 


144  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

have  no  such  group.  In  the  Lament  over  Saul  and  Jonathan, 
the  absence  of  any  religious  element  in  dealing  with  so 
solemn  a  theme  is  in  marked  contrast  with  the  deeply  religious 
character  of  the  psalms  ascribed  to  David. 

These  facts  render  it  difficult  to  believe  that  the  Davidic 
collections  consist  to  any  great  extent  of  psalms  written  by 
David  or  in  his  time.  Nevertheless,  the  tradition  that  David 
was  a  poet,  and  specially  interested  in  sacred  music,  is  early 
and  persistent^ ;  probably  he  composed  psalms,  some  of  which 
are  preserved  in  I.  and  perhaps  II.,  disguised  by  a  long 
process  of  editing. 

The  evidence  for  Davidic  authorship  is  strongest  for  xviii.,  a 
thanksgiving  for  success  in  war,  which  might  well  have  been 
written  by  the  victorious  poet-king.^ 

Pre-exilic  psalms  will  most  probably  be  found  in  the  Davidic 
collections,  those  mentioning  the  king  seem  to  presuppose  the 
existence  of  the  pre-exilic  kingdom,  />.,  ii.,  xviii.,  xx.,  xxi., 
xxviii.,  xlv.,  Ixi.,  Ixiii.,  Ixxii. ;  but  the  king  in  some  of  these 
may  be  borrowed  from  a  pre-exilic  model,  or  may  be  an 
archaic  ideal,  or  even,  as  has  been  suggested,  a  Greek  or 
Maccabaean  king,  or  some  of  these  psalms  may  be  purely 
Messianic. 

Outside  of  I.  and  II.  the  title  David  is  probably  due  to 
conjecture.  There  has  always  been  a  tendency  to  ascribe 
anonymous  psalms  to  David.  The  LXX.  ascribes  to  him 
many  psalms,  whith  are  anonymous  in  the  Hebrew,  while 
some  of  the  "  Davidic  "  psalms  in  V.  are  anonymous  in  some 
of  the  best  MSS.  of  the  LXX.  Later  on  "  David  "  becomes 
a  title  for  the  complete  Psalter.  N.T.  quotations  which 
connect  a  name  with  a  psalm,  invariably  quote  it  as  "  David," 

1  i,  Sam.  xvi.  i8,  Saul's  minstrel;  ii.  Sam.  i.,  the  Lament  over  Saul 
and  Jonathan  ;  iii.  33,  Lament  for  Abner  ;  vi.  5,  plays  before  Ark  ;  xxii., 
author  of  Psalm  xviii.  ;  xxiii.  1-7,  last  words  of  David ;  Am.  vi.  5, 
David  inventor  of  musical  instruments.  As  Sam.  is  composite,  the 
passages  cited  show  the  tradition  in  existence  at  different  times. 

2  So  Baethgen,  Konig,  Schultz,  etc.  ;  other  psalms  often  ascribed 
to  David  by  modern  critics  are  iii.,  iv.,  vi.-xii.,  xv.,xix.  1-6,  xxiv.  7-lo»  xxix, 
xxxii.  But,  according  to  Cheyne,  Introduction  to  Isaiah^  171,  "no  part 
of  the  Psalter  has  yet  been  shown  to  have  a  pre-exilic  basis.*' 


PSALMS  145 

even  when  it  is  anonymous  both  in  the  Hebrew  and  the 
LXX.,  e.g.^  ii.  in  Acts  iv.  25. 

Hence  the  chief  use  of  titles  is  to  enable  us  to  trace  earlier 
collections. 

(e)  Maccabcean  Psalms. — From  the  time  of  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia^  there  have  been  critics,  including  Calvin,  who 
have  held  that  the  historical  situation  implied  in  some  of 
the  Psalms  is  that  of  the  Maccabaean  period.^  The  psalms 
most  often  ascribed  to  this  period  are  xliv.,  Ixxiv.,  Ixxix., 
Ixxxiii.  In  these  psalms  the  Jews  are  suffering  cruel  perse- 
cution, the  Temple  has  been  defiled,  and  the  synagogues 
burnt,  there  is  no  prophet.^  Yet  the  Jews  maintain  their 
innocence,  they  are  persecuted  on  account  of  their  faithfulness 
to  Jehovah.*  The  only  corresponding  event  known  to  us  in 
O.T.  times  is  the  attempt  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  to  suppress 
Judaism,  in  the  course  of  which  he  tortured  and  massacred 
many  faithful  Jews,  sacked  Jerusalem,  and  polluted  the 
Temple.  The  persecution  was  checked,  Jerusalem  recovered, 
the  Temple  purified  and  reconsecrated,  and  Judaea  rendered 
independent  by  the  revolt  of  the  Maccabees.  As  an  Elohistic 
revision  of  these  psalms  occurs  in  H.  +  (HI.),  and  Robertson 
Smith  attributes  this  revision  to  a  pre-Maccabsean  editor,  he 
rejects  the  Maccabaean  date  for  xJiv.,  Ixxiv.,  Ixxix.,  and 
suggests  that  a  similar  persecution  may  have  taken  place 
under  Artaxerxes  Ochus,  c.  350.  Cheyne,  1891,^  regarded 
Ixxiv.  and  Ixxix.  as  Maccabaean,  but  his  analysis  of  Isaiah^ 
led  him  to  accept  the  view  that  such  a  persecution  took 
place  under  Ochus,  and  to  connect  Ixxiv.  and  Ixxix.  with 
that  persecution. 

Another  group  of  psalms  often  regarded  as  Maccabaean 

1  D.  A.D.  428. 

*  For  a  statement  of  the  views  of  older  critics  see  Appendix  I,  to 
Chkyne's  Origin  of  Psalter,  Amongst  later,  Cornill  and  Baethgen 
recognise  as  Maccabaean,  xliv.,  Ixxiv.,  Ixxix.,  Ixxxiii.  ;  and  Baethgen 
adds  ii.,  Ixix.,  ex.,  cxlix.,  "most  probably,"  and  Ixxv.,  cii.,  cviii., 
cxliv.,   "possibly." 

'  Ixxiv.  7,  8,  9,  Ixxix.  I.  *  xliv.  17-22,  Ixxix.  2,  Ixxxiii  3,  4. 

•  Origin  of  Psalter.  ®  Introduction ^  1895. 


146  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

comprises  ex.,  cxv,,  and  cxviii.  ex.,  gives  a  pieture  of  a  priest- 
king,  after  the  order  of  Melehisedee,  />.,  not  in  the  legiti- 
mate line  of  suecession,  whieh  exactly  describes  the  position 
of  the  Maccabaean  priest-kings,  the  first  of  whom  was  Simon, 
142-135.  As  the  first  four  verses,  neglecting  opening  formulae, 
begin  with  Sh^  M^  Ayin,  N^  some  have  seen  in  it  an  acrostic 
on  his  name;  but  the  attempts  to  fit  the  other  three  initials, 
Aleph,  Y,  M,  into  the  acrostic  have  not  been  successful. 

cxv.,  cxviii.  celebrate  a  successful  war,  in  which  the  leaders 
have  been  the  house  of  Aaron,  to  which  the  Maccabees 
belonged. 

If  any  of  these  are  Maeeabaean,  it  is  probable  that  other 
psalms,  which  do  not  clearly  reflect  their  historical  situation, 
also  belong  to  that  period.  We  should  naturally  expect  to 
find  most  of  these  in  IV.  and  V.^ 

Some  of  the  objections  to  the  existence  of  Maeeabaean 
psalms  have  been  dealt  with  already,^  viz.,  the  alleged  prior 
closing  of  the  Canon  and  of  the  Psalter.     Others  are : — 

(i.)  That  as  Maeeabaean  psalms  must  have  been  composed 
shortly  before  the  closing  of  the  Psalter,  the  names  of  the 
authors  would  have  been  known,  and  given  in  the  titles. 
But  the  anonymity  of  most  of  the  later  psalms  shows  that 
it  was  not  the  custom  to  affix  the  author's  name  to  productions 
known  to  be  recent. 

(ii.)  It  is  asserted  that  the  Maeeabaean  period  was  not  one 
of  literary  activity.  This  assumes  the  point  at  issue.  More- 
over Daniel  is  now  assigned  to  this  period,  and  Eeclesiasticus 
to  a  slightly  earlier  date,  c.  B.C.  180. 

(iii.)  The  language  of  most  of  the  psalms  supposed  to  be 
Maeeabaean  is  said  to  be  too  classical  for  so  late  a  period, 
but  the  fragments  of  the  Hebrew  original  of  Eeclesiasticus 
show  that  writers  of  the  period  imitated  classical  Hebrew  with 
tolerable  success. 

These  objections  are  not  sufficient  to  prove  that  there  are 

^  Chkyne,   Origin  of  Psalter^   1891,  accepted  26,  viz.,  20,  21,  33, 
44,  60,  61,  63,  74,  79,  83,  loi,  108,  115-118,  135-138,  145-150- 
«  Cf.  on  Growth  of  Psalter. 


PSALMS  147 

no  Maocabsean  psalms ;  in  the  case  of  those  mentioned  above, 
the  internal  evidence  is  strongly  in  favour  of  a  Maccabaean 
origin ;  others  probably  belong  to  the  same  period,  but  it  is 
difficult  to  identify  them. 

(f)  Use  in  N.T.;  Messianic  Psalms.— As  "David"  and  "son 
of  David"  were  synonymous  with  the  promised  Deliverer  of 
Israel,  and  "  David  "  became  a  title  of  the  Psalter,  the  N.T. 
freely  uses  the  Psalms  as  describing  the  character  and  ex- 
perience of  the  Messiah.  Messianic  psalms  may  be  divided 
into  : — 

(i.)  The  Righteous  King;  ii.  7,  "Thou  art  my  Son,  etc.,"  is 
applied  to  Christ,  Acts  xiii.  33,  Hebrews  i.  5,  v.  5 ;  also,  "Thy 
throne,  O  God,  etc.,"  xlv.  6,  in  Hebrews  i.  8,  9 ;  ex.,  with  its 
king,  who  is  also  priest  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec,  is 
applied  to  Christ  in  Hebrews  v.-x.,  Matthew  xxii.  44,  etc., 
"  If  David  call  him  Lord,  etc.,"  Acts  ii.  34  f.,  and  i.  Corinthians 
XV.  25.1 

(ii.)  The  Innocent  Sufferer ;  "  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast 
thou  forsaken  me,"  Matthew  xxvii.  46,  etc.,  is  from  xxii.  i ; 
xxii.  18,  "The  casting  of  lots"  is  applied  to  the  Passion,  John 
xix.  24;  xxxi.  5,  in  Luke  xxiii.  46,  and  xxxiv.  20  in  John  xix.  36.2 

(iii.)  The  Typical  Man;  viii.,  the  divinely  appointed  relation 
of  Mankind  to  Nature  and  the  Angels,  is  appHed  to  Christ, 
Matthew  xxi.  16,  Hebrews  ii.  6,  7,  i.  Corinthians  xv.  27. 

(iv.)  The  Perfect  Believer ;  xvi.  8-io,  "Thou  wilt  not  leave 
my  soul  in  hell,  etc.,"  was  applied  to  the  Resurrection  by  St. 
Peter  at  Pentecost,  and  by  St.  Paul  at  Antioch  in  Pisidia, 
Acts  ii.  25  ff.,  xiii.  35.^ 

The  Psalter  possesses  a  special  Messianic  character  as  con- 
taining some  of  the  loftiest  and  purest  ideals,  and  most  exalted 
anticipations  of  O.T.  religion,  in  some  of  which,  at  any  rate, 

^  Cf.  also  ii.  I,  Acts  iv.  25  ;  xviii.  49,  Rom.  xv.  9.  Other  psalms 
sometimes  included  in  this  class  are  xx.,  xxi.,  xl.,  Ixi.,  Ixxii.,  Ixxxix. 

'^  Cf.  also  xxii.  22,  Heb.  ii.  12 ;  xxxv.  19  and  Ixix.  4,  John  xv.  25  ;  xli. 
9,  John  xiii.  18,  of  Judas  ;  Ixix.  9,  John  ii.  17,  Rom.  xv.  3  ;  Ixix.  23,  Rom. 
xi.  9  f.  ;  Ixix.  25,  Acts  i.  20,  of  Judas. 

*  Cf.  also  xl.  7,  Heb.  x.  5-7. 


148  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

the  authors  consciously  express  expectations  whose  complete 
fulfilment  lay  beyond  their  own  horizon.^ 

(g)  Contents  and  Teaching. — As  these  are  too  rich  and  varied 
to  admit  of  detailed  treatment,  the  Psalms  have  been  arranged 
in  groups.  But  a  single  psalm  often  touches  on  several 
subjects,  so  that  the  classification  is  only  roughly  accurate. 

I.,  The  appeal  of  the  sufferer  for  deliverance. 

(i.)  The  appeal  of  Israel  against  her  oppressors,  44,  60,  74, 
94,  129-132,  137. 

(ii.)  The  appeal  of  the  suffering  saint — the  Israelite  or 
Israel — against  the  oppression  of  sinners,  mostly  either  the 
Gentiles,  or  the  Jews  who  ally  themselves  with  them.  Such 
alliances  are  known  between  Jewish  nobles  and  the  Samaritans 
in  the  time  of  Nehemiah,  and  between  the  hellenising  Jews 
and  the  Greeks  in  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and 
doubtless  existed  at  other  times,  3-5,  7,  10-14,  17,  22a,2  26- 
28,  31,  35,  4i-43>  53-59.  62,  64,  69-71,  89b,3  109,  120,  123, 
140-143. 

(iii.)  The  appeal  of  the  sufferer  for  deliverance,  6,  39,  40, 
61,  63,  86,  88,  90,  102. 

(iv.)  The  appeal  of  the  sinner  for  mercy,  25,  38,  51. 

II.,  Praise  and  Thanksgiving. 

(i.)  For  the  actual  or  prospective  deliverance  of  the  righteous 
and  punishment  of  the  wicked,  the  speaker  being  still  in  the 
shadow  of  recent  trouble,  9,  16,  21,  22b,*  23,  30,  32,  36,  52, 
75,  116,  124,  138. 

(ii.)  Confident  prayer  and  praise,  and  expressions  of  confi- 
dent faith.      There  is  a  tone  of  unclouded  brightness  about 

*  Cf,  also  X.  7,  Rom.  iii.  14;  xiv.  =liii.,  Rom.  iii.  10-18;  xix.  4,  Rom. 
X.  18;  xxiv.  I,  i.  Cor.  x.  26;  xxxii.  i,  Rom.  iv.  7,  8;  xxxiv.  12  f.,  i.  Pet. 
iii.  10  f.  ;  xxxvi.  i,  Rom.  iiu  18  ;  xliv.  22,  Rom.  viii.  36  ;  Ii.  4,  Rom.  iii. 
4  ;  Ixviil  18,  Eph.  iv,  8  ;  Ixxxii,  6,  John  x.  34  ;  Ixxxix.  20,  Acts  xiii.  22  ; 
xc.  4,  ii  Pet.  iii.  8;  xci.  ii  f.,  Matt.  iv.  6,  Temptation;  xciv.  ii,  i.  Cor. 
iii.  20;  xcv.  7  fF.,  Heb.  iii.  7  ff. ;  xcvii.  7,  Heb.  i.  6;  cii.  25  f.,  Heb.  i. 
10  f.  ;  civ.  4,  Heb.  i.  7 ;  cix.  8,  Acts  i.  20,  Judas ;  cxii.  9,  ii.  Cor.  ix.  9 ; 
cxvi.  10,  ii.  Cor.  iv.  13;  cxvii.  i,  Rom.  xv.  ii  ;  cxviii.  6,  Heb.  xiii.  6; 
cxviii.  22,  "The  stone  which  the  builders  rejected";  Matt.  xxi.  42,  etc, 
Acts  iv.  II,  i.  Pet.  ii,  7  ;  cxl.  3,  Rom.  iii.  13. 

'  Verses  1-2 1.  *  Verses  38-51.  •*  Verses  22-31. 


PSALMS  149 

these  psalms.  Many  are  expressly  national,  and  some  cele- 
brate the  triumph  of  Israel  over  its  enemies,  2,  20,  24b,i  34, 
46-48,  5oa,2  65-68,  76,  84,  S5,  91,  92,  95,  loi,  103,  108,  no, 
III,  113,  115,  117,  118,  121,  122,  125,  128,  134,  144,  146, 
150. 

(iii.)  Praise  of  God  in  Nature  and  Providence,  8,  iga,^  29, 
93,  104,  107,  145-147- 

(iv.)  Praise  of  the  Law,  19b,*  119. 

(v.)  Praise  of  Zion,  87. 

III.,  Historical  Retrospects,  78,  81,  89a,5   105,   106,  114, 

i35»  136. 

IV.,  Exposition  of  the  Doctrine  of  Rewards  and  Punish- 
ments, parallel  to  Proverbs,  i,  15,  24a,^  37,  49,  50b,''  112. 

v.,  Discussion  of  the  apparent  failure  of  Divine  Justice, 
parallel  to  Job,  73. 

VI.,  Marriage  Ode,  45. 

VII.,  Eulogy  of  a  King,  72. 

Probably  when  45  and  72  were  included  in  the  complete 
Psalter,  a  spiritual  or  Messianic  interpretation  had  been  given 
to  them.  It  is  often  supposed  that  in  most  of  the  psalms 
which  use  the  first  person  singular  the  speaker  is  the  com- 
munity— a  view  supported  by  the  long  and  widespread  use 
of  the  Psalter  in  public  worship.  Yet  such  psalms  would 
be  based  on  personal  experience,  since  the  Psalter  has  also 
proved  to  be  a  perfect  manual  of  private  devotion. 

(h)  I^orm  of  Hebrew  Poetry, — Hebrew  verse  is  distinguished 
from  prose  not  by  the  use  of  rhyme  or  alliteration,  or  of 
special  arrangements  of  accents  or  quantities,  but  by  a 
correspondence  of  sense,  and,  in  a  secondary  degree,  of 
form,  called  parallelism.  The  unit  of  Hebrew  verse  is 
usually  a  couplet,  less  often  a  triplet,  and  occasionally 
a  set  of  four,  five,  or  six  lines.  The  correspondence  of 
sense  between  two  members  of  a  couplet  is  of  the  most 
varied  description. 

Each  of  the  two  members  may  express  the  same  or  a  very 

1  Verses  7-10.    2  Verses  1-15.    '  Verses  1-6.    ■*  Verses  7-14. 
•  Verses  1-37.    *  Verses  1-6.    ''  Verses  16-23. 


150  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

similar  idea,  in  which  case  we  have  synonymous  parallelism^ 
e.g.y  Psalm  Ixix.  8, 

*  •  I  am  become  a  stranger  unto  my  brethren, 
And  an  alien  unto  my  mother's  children." 

Sometimes   the  two   members   express   contrasted  truths, 

which  both   illustrate  the   same  general  principle,  in  which 

case  we  have  antithetic  parallelism^  e.g.^  Psalm  xxxii.   lo, 

**  Many  sorrows  shall  be  to  the  wicked  : 
But  he  that  trusteth  in  the  Lord,  mercy  shall  compass  him  about."* 

Sometimes  the  second  member  of  a  couplet  merely  com- 
pletes or  supplements  the  sense  of  the  first,  in  which  case      ^ 
we  have  synthetic  parallelism^  e.g.^  Psalm  ii.  6,  ^^ 

"  Yet  I  have  set  my  king 
Upon  my  holy  hill  of  Zion." 

Such  couplets  are  only  distinguished  from  prose  by  the 
context,  and,  perhaps,  by  a  certain  similarity  of  length  and 
sound  between  the  two  members ;  the  general  rhythm  of  a 
psalm  would  guide  a  singer  or  punctuator  in  dividing  a  verse 
into  its  two  halves. 

The  subdivisions  of  these  kinds  of  parallelism  have  been 
variously  named  by  different  scholars.  Two  striking  peculiar- 
ities are:  (i.)  the  actual  repetition  of  a  phrase  from  (a)  in 
(b),  e.g.y  Psalm  xcVii.  5, 

**  The  hills  melted  like  wax  at  the  presence  of  Jehovah, 
At  the  presence  of  the  Lord  of  the  whole  earth." 

and  (ii.)  the  implied  repetition  of  a  word  or  phrase  from  (a)  in 

(b),  e.g.i  Psalm  xviii.  41, 

"  They  cried,  but  there  was  none  to  save  : 
Even  unto  Jehovah,  but  he  answered  them  not." 

'  Two  common  forms  of  the  relation  of  the  two  members  (a),  (b)  of  a 
couplet  in  antithetic  parallelism  may  be  illustrated  mathematically. 
We  may  have — 

(a)  A  is  equal  to  B. 

(b)  A  is  not  equal  to  -B,  e.g.^  Proverbs  xvi.  10, 

"A  divine  sentence  is  in  the  lips  of  the  king : 
Or  affain ^^^  mouth  shall  not  transgress  in  judgment.* 

(a)  A=B. 

(b)  -A=  -B,  e.g.i  Proverbs  XV.  18, 

"A  wrathful  man  stirreth  up  contention  : 
But  he  that  is  slow  to  anger  appeaseth  strife.  ** 


PSALMS 


151 


Correspondence  of  form  naturally  arose  out  of  that  of 
sense,  and  sometimes,  as  we  have  seen,  was  accepted  as  a 
substitute  for  it,  though,  as  a  rule,  there  is  a  relation  of 
sense  between  the  two  members  of  such  couplets,  which 
produces  the  feeling  of  balance  or  parallelism.  The  con- 
nection of  form  and  sense  is  best  illustrated  by  Psalm  xix.  7-9, 
where  there  is  a  correspondence  of  "noun  to  noun,  verb  to 
verb,  adjective  to  adjective." 


"The  law 
The  testimony 
The  precepts 
The  commandment 
The  fear 
The  judgments 


of  Jehovah  is  perfect, 
of  Jehovah  is  sure, 
of  Jehovah  are  right, 
of  Jehovah  is  pure, 
of  Jehovah  is  clean, 
of  Jehovah  are  true, 


restoring 

making  wise 

rejoicing 

enlightening 

enduring 

righteous 


the  soul ; 
the  simple ; 
the  heart ; 
the  eyes  ; 
for  ever ; 
altogether." 


In  triplets  and  larger  groups  of  lines  the  different  kinds 
of  parallelism  are  variously  combined  in  much  the  same 
way  as  the  rhymes  in  the  various  stanzas  of  English  poetry. 
In  the  same  psalm  the  parallelisms  may  be  of  different 
kinds,  but  there  is  a  tendency  either  to  use  lines  of  about 
the  same  length  throughout  a  psalm  or  strophe,  or  else  to 
arrange  the  lengths  on  some  regular  principle.  The  con- 
clusion of  strophes  is  often  indicated  by  a  refrain,  e.g., 
Psalm  xlvi.  7,   11, 

"  Jehovah  Sabaoth  is  with  us  ; 
The  God  of  Jacob  is  our  refuge." 

The  psalmists  occasionally  composed  alphabetic  acrostics ; 
the  most  striking  is  cxix.,  which  consists  of  twenty-two  six- 
lined  strophes.  In  each  strophe  each  of  the  six  lines  begins 
with  the  same  letter :  in  the  first  strophe  with  Aleph,  in  the 
second  with  Beth,  etc.  Hence  in  the  English  versions  each 
strophe  is  headed  with  the  name  or  symbol  of  its  Hebrew 
letter.  Other  more  or  less  perfect  alphabetic  acrostics  are 
ix. -hx.,  XXV.,  xxxiv.,  xxxvii.,  cxi.,  cxii.,  cxix.,  cxlv.  Psalm  ex. 
has  been  read  as  an  acrostic  on  Simon  the  Maccabee.^ 

Numerous  attempts  have  been  made  to  discover  hexameters 
and  similar  metres  in  the  O.T.,  but  none  of  them  are  generally 


Cf.  (a). 


152  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

regarded  as  successful.  The  poetry  of  the  O.T.  is  not  con- 
fined to  the  books  which  are  specially  called  "Poetical,"^ 
but  is  found  in  the  Prophets,  and  in  the  songs,  etc.  in  the 
historical  books. ^ 

3.  Proverbs. 

(a)  Composition^  Daie^  and  Authorship, — Proverbs  in  many 
ways  resembles  the  Psalter.  It  is  a  collection  of  collections 
of  short  poems,  assigned  by  headings  to  different  authors ;  the 
tendency  has  been  to  give  the  titles  Solomon  and  David  to  the 
complete  books,  because  these  two  kings  were  typical  repre- 
sentatives of  the  wisdom  and  psalmody  of  Israel.  Just  as 
the  Psalter  contains  two  earlier  collections  with  the  title 
*'  David,"  separated  by  psalms  with  other  titles ;  so  here 
there  are  two  earlier  collections  with  the  title  "Solomon," 
separated  by  proverbs  ascribed  to  "the  Wise."  These  facts 
suggest  that  Proverbs  and  the  Psalter  had  similar  histories. 

Thus  Proverbs,  as  the  national  storehouse  of  proverbial 
wisdom,  would  be  likely  to  receive  additions  as  long  as 
Hebrew  was  a  living  language,  or  at  any  rate  till  some  edition 
of  it  had  been  current  long  enough  to  receive  a  canonical 
status.  The  production  of  a  new  collection  of  proverbs  in 
Ecclesiasticus  instead  of  an  enlarged  edition  of  our  book 
shows  that  the  latter  was  completed  some  time  before  B.C. 
200. 

According  to  the  analogy  of  the  titles  in  the  Psalter 
and  elsewhere,  the  headings  may  have  been  added  by  late 
editors.  The  prologue, "  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  etc.,"  i.  1-6,  was 
probably  prefixed  by  the  compiler  of  the  last  edition  ^ ;  neither 
here  nor  in  x.  i,  xxv.  i,  need  the  title  imply  that  all  the  pro- 
verbs were  composed  by  Solomon. 

So  far,  we  may  place  the  final  editing  of  Proverbs  at  some 
date  between  the  formation  of  the  last  collection  and  c,  b.c. 
250.     We  have  therefore  to  see  within  what  hmits  we  can  fix 

1  Psalms,  Job,  Cant.,  Eccles.,  Prov. 

'  Cf.  Lamentations,  pp.  212  f.,  and  Prov.,  pp.  152,  156. 

*  But  XXX.  f,,  may  have  been  added  later  still. 


PROVERBS  153 

the  dates  of  these  collections.  The  degree  of  certainty  attain- 
able is  lessened  not  only  by  the  presence  of  proverbs  much 
older  than  the  collections  in  which  they  stand,  but  also  by  the 
probability  that  some  proverbs  were  inserted  and  others 
brought  up  to  date  even  after  a  collection  had  been  formed 
and  a  title  prefixed  to  it. 

The  following  table  states  a  form  of  the  prevalent  view  as 
to  Proverbs ;  titles  in  inverted  commas  : — 

A,  i.  1-6,  Prologue  by  final  editor  referring  to  the  book  as 

"  Proverbs  of  Solomon." 

B,  i.  7-ix.,  Late  addition,  placed  at  the  beginning  as  suitable 

introduction. 

C,  X.  i-xxii.  16,  "Solomon,"  oldest  main  collection. 

D  and  E,  xxii.  17-xxiv.  22,  "the  Wise";  and  xxiv.  23-34, 
"the  Wise,"  two  appendices  to  C,  combined  with  it 
before  the  other  parts  of  the  book  were  added. 

F,  xxv.-xxix.,    "  Solomon,   copied    out "  by  the    "  Men    of 

Hezekiah,"   second   main  collection,  added  to  CDE 
as  supplement. 

G,  H,  and   I,   xxx.,   "Agur";  xxxi.   1-9,   "Lemuel"  xxxi. ; 

10-31,  three  appendices,  the  two  former  post-exilic,  the 
last  perhaps  pre-exilic. 

Thus  C  is  commonly  regarded  as  the  oldest  collection, 
though  some^  would  assign  the  priority  to  F. 

C  is  often  2  assigned  to  the  early  monarchy,  to  which  period 
it  must,  of  course,  belong  if  it  is  older  than  F,  and  if  the  title 
which  assigns  F  to  the  time  of  Hezekiah  is  correct.  Very 
many  of  the  proverbs  in  C  imply  the  historical  situation  of 
the  period ;  the  king  is  spoken  of  with  respect  and  apprecia- 
tion,3  the  general  situation  seems  one  of  settled  order  and 
moderate  prosperity,  such  as  prevailed  in  the  Israelite  states 
before  the  social  evils  denounced  by  Amos,  Hosea,  and  Isaiah 
came  to  a  head.  A  contentious  woman  is  one  of  the  mosi 
serious  troubles  of  life. 

*  e.g.y  A.  B.  Davidson,  Encyd.  Brit. 

'  Davidson,  Encyd,  Brii.;  Cheyne,/<73,  etc.,  p.  133. 

•  xvi.  10-15,  xix.  12,  XX.  8,  26,  28,  xxi.  i. 


154  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

On  the  other  hand  there  are  features  which  seem  to  belong 
to  a  later  period.^  It  is  strange  that  we  find  no  traces  of  the 
fierce  polemic  of  the  prophets  against  Baal-worship  and 
idolatry.  Even  if  the  collection  was  formed  before  these 
controversies  arose,  would  it  have  passed  through  them  un- 
altered ?  Again,  advanced  ethics  need  not  be  a  sign  of  a  late 
date,  benevolence  and  pity,  within  limited  circles,  have  always 
been  popular ;  but  such  sayings  as 

"Jehovah  hath  made  everything  for  its  own  end : 
Yea,  even  the  wicked  for  the  day  of  evil "  (xvi.  4), 
and 

"  The  spirit  of  man  is  the  lamp  of  Jehovah," 

"Searching  all  the  innermost  parts  of  the  belly  "  (xx.  27), 
point  to  a  period  when  long  reflection  had  been  devoted  to 
the  problems  of  theology  and  the  spiritual  life.      They  may, 
however,  have  been  added  after  the  collection  was  formed. 

The  almost  uniform  use  in  C  of  couplets  in  antithetic 
parallelism  is  not  necessarily  due  to  the  compiler,  but  may 
be  due  to  a  traditional  convention.  The  repetition  of  the 
same  or  part  of  a  proverb  in  different  places  ^  indicates  that  C 
was  compiled  from  earlier  smaller  collections. 

If  the  heading  xxv.  i  is  accepted,  the  appendices  D,  E 
to  C  might  naturally,  but  not  necessarily,^  be  placed  between 
C  and  the  time  of  Hezekiah.  These  appendices  would  very 
well  reflect  the  vice,  extravagance,  and  oppression  of  the 
eighth  century.  Repetitions  occur*  in  D,  E,  which  also 
repeat  parts  of  proverbs  from  C.^  The  introduction  to  D, 
xxii.  17-21,  resembles  i.  1-6,  and  may  also  have  been  added 
by  the  final  editor. 

The  heading  of  F,  "These  also  are  the  Proverbs  of 
Solomon,  which  the  men  of  Hezekiah  .  .  .  copied  out," 
would  be  a  most  satisfactory  pivot  for  the  criticism  of 
Proverbs,  if  it  could  be  certainly  relied  on.     It  gives  us  a 

1  Corn  ILL,  post- exilic. 

2  e.g.,  xiv.  I2=xvi.  2$,  CiiEYifK,  Jod,  etc.,  133,  enumerates  nineteen 
instances. 

3  F  may  have  existed  long  before  its  combination  with  CDE. 

*  e.g.f  xxiii.  I7a  =  xxiv.  la.  °  e.g.y  xxiv.  2ob  =  xiii.  9b. 


PROVERBS  155 

date  for  F,  and  as  the  "also"  implies  another  collection, 
which  can  scarcely  be  other  than  C,  it  shows  that  C  is 
still  older.  If  F  is  the  older  collection,  the  heading  will 
still  be  later  than  C,  and  therefore  not  contemporary,  but 
the  work  of  the  editor  who  combined  CDE  and  F,  who 
may  be  the  final  editor.  The  Chronicler  mentions  no  such 
literary  activity  on  the  part  of  Hezekiah,  though  we  might 
expect  that  he  would  have  done  so,  if  this  heading  lay 
before  him.^  The  proverbs  in  F  imply  less  settled  and 
prosperous  times  than  those  in  C,  and  the  king  or  ruler 
is  sometimes  spoken  of  as  an  oppressor.^  The  collection 
may  reflect  the  troubled  days  when  Samaria  was  tottering 
to  its  fall,  and  Jerusalem  was  expecting  to  share  its  fate. 
Yet  the  evils  dwelt  on  are  rather  those  of  a  society  under 
an  iniquitous  government,  which  uses  part  of  the  people  as 
instruments  of  its  oppression ;  and  the  contentious  woman  is 
still  prominent.  We  do  not  seem  to  be  on  the  verge  of  great 
catastrophes.  The  antithesis  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,  and  the  quaUties  assigned  to  them  remind  us  of 
post-exilic  psalms,  and  the  references  to  the  law  suggest  a 
post-exilic  date.^  Cheyne,  however,  regards  F  as  of  the 
age  of  Hezekiah,  or,  at  any  rate,  pre-exihc,^  and  Driver  ^ 
writes:  "The  title  (xxv.  i),  the  accuracy  of  which  there  is 
no  reason  to  question." 

F  also  repeats  proverbs  or  parts  of  proverbs  from  C.^ 

The  three  concluding  appendices,  Agur,  Lemuel,  and  the 

Capable    Woman,    are    generally    regarded    as    post-exilic.'' 

Agur's   meditation    on    the    Divine   Transcendence   belongs 

to  a  very  late  period  of  Jewish  theology.^     His  quaternions 

1  CORNILL.  ^  e.g.^  xxix.  2. 

'  xxviii.  4-9,  xxix.  i8,  the  passages  do  not  seem  to  be  additions,  and  to 
render  tord  **  instruction  "  or  "  revelation  "  is  hardly  in  accordance  with  the 
concrete,  practical  nature  of  the  proverbs  in  this  section. 

*  Job,  etc.,  pp.  145-149  ;  cf.  Origin  of  Psalter,  pp.  409,  457. 
°  Introduction,  p.  383,  similarly  Nowack,  p.  xxvii. 

*  Cheyne, yi3<^,  etc.,  p.  143,  enumerates  11  cases. 
7  Driver,  p.  382,  "doubtless." 

'  xxx.  5-9  almost  reads  like  a  marginal  gloss,  the  protest  of  a  pious 
reader,  who  prayed  that  he  might  be  kept  from  such  dangerous  speculations 
as  those  of  Agur. 


156  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

remind  one  of  similar  groups  in  the  rabbinical  sayings  in 
Pirqe  Aboth.  The  few  verses  addressed  to  Lemuel  contain 
striking  Aramaisms. 

A  post-exilic  date  is  suggested  for  "  the  Capable  Woman  "  ^ 
by  its  being  an  acrostic — the  other  O.T.  acrostics  ^  are,  as 
far  as  we  know,  post-exilic — and  by  its  position  in  the  book.^ 
Othenvise  the  quiet,  prosperous  circumstances  implied  in  this 
picture  of  a  strenuous  housewife  might  be  those  of  the  early 
monarchy.  The  language  of  the  poem  would  be  consistent 
with  such  a  date. 

The  date  of  A  and  B,  which  are  probably  by  the  final 
editor,*  is  another  crucial  point  of  the  criticism  of  Proverbs. 
Their  similarity  to  Deuteronomy  has  led  many  to  place  them 
in-^  the  closing  period  of  the  Jewish  monarchy.  But  other 
considerations  point  to  a  post-exilic  date;^  the  personification 
of  Wisdom  is  a  great  advance  on  Job  xxviii.,  and  is  closely 
akin  to  Ecclesiasticus  xxiv.  and  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon ;  the 
account  of  the  divine  working  in  Creation  and  Providence 
is  an  advance  on  Genesis  i.  The  elaborate  structure  of  some 
of  the  sentences,  especially  in  ii.,'^  suggests  the  influence  of  a 
knowledge  of  Greek.^ 

Thus  the  general  conclusion  indicated  is  that  the  complete 
work  is  post-exilic,  not  later  than  c.  B.C.  250;  and  that 
probably  C  and  perhaps  F  were  compiled  before  the  Exile, 
and  A  -I-  B  after  the  Exile.^ 

When  we  come  to  the  contents  of  these  collections,  we 

^  'Esheth  hayily  for  which  there  is  no  English  equivalent.  "Virtuous 
Woman  "  quite  misleads  the  reader,  to  whom  it  suggests  absence  of  vices, 
especially  one  particular  vice,  and  not  the  active,  successful  well-doing 
denoted  by  the  Hebrew,  "Excellent  Woman"  has  also  been  well 
suggested. 

^  Pages  151  f.  '  But  see  p.  153.  •*  So  Cornill,  etc. 

5  A.  B.  Davidson,  Encycl.  BHt.  ;  Driver;  Cheyne,  in  Job  ^  etc., 
p.  168,  but  cf.  below. 

^  So  Cornill;  Cheyne,  Founders,  etc.,  p.  340;  Kautzsch,  Bibel, 
ii.  212;  KoNiG,  Smend,  p.  510. 

'  Sometimes  spoken  of  as  a  single  sentence. 

^  The  dependence  of  i.-ix.  on  Job,  and  of  Job  on  i.-ix.,  have  been 
asserted  with  equal  positiveness  ;  cf,  p.  132. 

'  According  to  Wildeboer,  the  book  was  compiled  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Greek  period ;  the  older  collections  at  the  close  of  the  Persian 
period.     So  Toy ;  but  xxx. ,  xxxi. ,  second  century. 


PROVERBS  157 

raise  the  question  of  the  share  of  Solomon  in  the  book. 
Solomonic  proverbs  and  Davidic  psalms  present  very  similar 
problems.  Both  are  supported  by  ancient  tradition ;  ^  are 
very  probable  when  all  the  evidence  has  been  considered, 
and  are  naturally  to  be  looked  for  in  the  oldest  collections 
bearing  the  names  of  David  and  Solomon.  But  in  neither 
case  is  it  likely  that  even  the  oldest  collection  is  wholly  or 
substantially  David's  or  Solomon's,  and  definite  criteria  for 
Solomonic  proverbs  are  more  entirely  absent  than  for 
Davidic  Psalms.  The  contents  of  C  suggest  that  the 
compiler  was  rather  a  man  in  moderate  circumstances 
moving  in  middle-class  society  than  a  magnificent  and 
luxurious  king  surrounded  by  a  splendid  court.  Sayings 
of  Solomon  would  reach  such  an  editor,  but  are  not  now 
distinguishable  from  his  other  material.  Where  the  evidence 
is  so  vague,  critical  opinion  naturally  varies  widely.  Professor 
A.  B.  Davidson  writes  ^  of  Proverbs :  "  Much  "  in  the  book 
"  may  be  referred  to  the  age  of  Solomon,  particularly  the 
sayings  in  chapters  x.-xxii.,  though  much  even  in  this  division 
may  be  later  " ;  on  the  other  hand,  a  distinguished  critic  denies 
Solomon  any  share  in  Proverbs.^ 

(b)  Text, — The  LXX.  differs  very  widely  from  the  Hebrew ; 
it  makes  numerous  additions,  some  of  which  are  also  found  in 
the  Vulgate  or  Syriac.  For  instance,  after  vi.  6-8,  which 
commend  the  ant  as  an  example,  the  LXX.  adds  a  similar 
passage  on  the  bee.  The  order  of  some  sections  is  different, 
the  most  important  change  being  the  insertion  of  xxx.  1-14 
(part  of  Agur)  between  xxiv.  22  and  23;  and  xxx.  15-xxxi.  9 
(rest  of  Agur,  and  Lemuel),  between  xxiv.  34,  and  xxv.  i. 
This  arrangement  indicates  that  the  three  appendices  G,  H,  I 
were  combined  with  the  rest  of  the  book  in  different  ways  by 
different  editors. 

The  headings,  x.  i,  "Proverbs  of  Solomon,"  xxiv.  23,  "These 

^  i.  Kings  iv.  32. 

*  Job^  C.B.S.,  p.  Ix.  J  Strack  speaks  of  C  as  substantially  {inhalilich) 
Solomonic. 

'  Smend,  A.T,  Theol.,  p.  510  n.,  "Mit  den  kanonischen  Proverbien 
hat  Salomo  freilich  nichts  zu  thun. " 


158  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

also  are  of  the  Wise,"'  xxx.  i,  "Words  of  Agur,"  etc.,  xxxi.  i, 
"Words  of  Lemuel,"  etc.,  are  omitted,  in  order  that  the 
"  Proverbs  of  Solomon  "  in  i.  i,  may  be  understood  to  extend 
to  the  whole  book. 

(c)  Contents. — I.  i-6,  General  Heading. 

"The  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  the  son  of  David,  King  of 
Israel,"  and  statement  of  purpose  of  book. 

I.  7-IX.,  In  Praise  of  Wisdom. 

Chiefly  in  couplets  and  synonymous  parallelism. 

i.  7-vii.,  A  series  of  didactic  poems,  mostly  beginning  "  My 
son,"  exhorting  the  reader  to  practise  virtues  and  avoid  vice, 
and  thus  follow  wisdom. 

viii.,  ix..  Wisdom  invites  men  to  her  banquet ;  warns  them 
against  folly.  Wisdom  as  God's  agent  in  creation  and  provi- 
dence. 

X.  i-XXII.  16,  "The  Proverbs  of  Solomon."2 

A  collection  of  miscellaneous  aphorisms  on  life  and  con- 
duct, for  the  most  part  secular  rather  than  distinctly  re- 
ligious; almost  entirely  in  couplets,  and  chiefly  in  antithetic 
parallelism. 

XXII.  17-XXIV.  22,  "The  Words  of  the  Wise."3 

xxii.  17-21,  Purpose  of  collection,  stated  in  first  person  by 
compiler. 

xxii.  22-xxiv.  22,  A  similar  collection  to  x.-xxii.  16.  The 
grouping  of  the  lines  is  very  varied,  from  couplets  to  a  set  of 
eight  clauses,  but  quatrains  are  most  frequent.  The  parallel- 
ism is  chiefly  synonymous. 

xxiv.  23-34,.  "These  also  are  the  sayings  of  the  Wise."* 
Appendix  to  above,  including  "  the  Parable  of  the  Sluggard." 
Grouping  of  lines  varied,  parallelism  synthetic  or  synonymous. 

XXV. -XXIX.,  "Proverbs  of  Solomon." 

"  These  also  are  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  which  the  men 
of  Hezekiah,  king  of  Judah,  copied  out."    Another  similar 

^  Replaced  by  an  exhortation  similar  to  xxii.  17. 
2  This  heading  is  omitted  by  LXX.  and  Syr. 

*  xxii.  17. 

*  LXX.  omits  and  replaces  by  a  hortatory  clause  like  xxii.  17. 


PROVERBS  159 

collection ;  couplets  preponderate,  but  both  grouping  of  lines 
and  parallelism  are  varied. 

XXX.,  "The  Words  of  Agur,  the  Son  of  Jakeh,  the 
Oracle."^ 

Nothing  is  known  of  Agur,  the  name  may  be  symbolic, 
"hireling"  or  "collector  of  wisdom."^ 

A  series  of  epigrams,  from  two  to  ten  lines  each,  on  the 
Divine  Transcendence,  four  wicked  generations,  four  insatiable 
things,  four  wonderful  things,  four  intolerable  things,  four 
things  that  are  little  but  wise,  four  stately  things,  etc. 

XXXI.   1-9,  "The  Words  of  King  Lemuel."^ 

"The  oracle  which  his  mother  taught  him." 

Nothing  is  known  of  Lemuel,  possibly  a  symbolic  name, 
"  belonging  to  God."  Unless  it  is  thought  necessary  to  claim 
every  verse  of  the  book  for  Solomon,  there  is  no  ground  for 
identifying  either  Agur  or  Lemuel  with  the  Wise  King. 

Warnings  against  debauchery  and  injustice. 

XXXL  10-31,  The  Capable  Woman. 

An  alphabetic  acrostic,  chiefly  in  couplets  and  synonymous 
parallelism ;  in  praise  of  the  capable  woman. 

(d)  Teaching. — The  general  theme  of  Proverbs  is  the 
practical  advantage  of  industry  and  prudence,  honesty  and 
godliness.  The  problems  of  Job  are  ignored,  as  they  mostly 
are  in  Ecclesiasticus,  probably  not  because  they  were  still 
unknown,  but  because  they  were  not  urgent  at  the  times  and 
under  the  circumstances  when  the  collections  were  compiled. 
The  Proverbs  state  practical  truths  of  average  life,  and  com- 
fortable, prosperous  men  of  a  practical  turn  of  mind  have  a 
gift  for  ignoring  both  speculative  difficulties  and  exceptional 
suffering.  Proverbs  also  ignores  polygamy,^  and,  so  far,  may 
be  said  to  praise  monogamy.     The  great  passage  on  Wisdom  ^ 

1  So  R.V.  Text,  R.V.  Mg.,  "burden";  others  propose  "of  Massa," 
understanding  Massa  as  a  proper  name,  possibly  a  district  of  Arabia. 
LXX.  omits  XXX.  i. 

'  "Ithiel"  and  "  Ucal "  should  not  be  taken  as  proper  names,  but 
translated  as  R.V.  Mg. 

^  R.V.,  or,  as  R.V.  Mg.,  Lemuel,  king  of  Massa.    LXX.  omits. 

*  Sometimes  regarded  as  evidence  of  post-exilic  origin.       ^  viii.  f. 


i6o  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

is  the  basis  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Wisdom,  as  an 
almost  personal  manifestation  of  God  in  His  working;  it  is 
also  one  of  the  most  striking  O.T.  statements  of  God's 
creative  and  providential  activity. 

(e)  Use  in  iV:r.— The  "Whom  the  Lord  loveth,  He 
chasteneth,"  of  Hebrews  xii.  5  f,  is  from  iii.  1 1  f.;  the  "  cheerful 
giver," ^  of  ii.  Corinthians  ix.  7,  is  a  reminiscence  of  xxii.  8, 
LXX.2  The  description  of  Christ  as  "  the  Wisdom  of  God  "^ 
prepared  the  way  for  the  later  identification  of  Christ  with 
"  Wisdom,"  which  made  the  statement  that  God  created 
Wisdom*  a  proof  text  of  Arian  polemics. 

4.  Ecclesiastes. 

(a)  Title. — The  Hebrew  title  Qoheleth  has  been  variously 
interpreted.  It  is  a  derivative  of  qdhdly  an  assembly,  and  is 
in  form  an  active  feminine  participle,  "one  who  calls  or 
addresses  an  assembly."  It  has  been  taken  (i.)  as  agreeing 
with  Wisdom  understood,  but  i.  1 2,  "  I,  Qoheleth,  was  king," 
shows  that  it  refers  to  Solomon ;  therefore  we  should  adopt 
(ii.)  that  the  feminine  form  is  used,  as  in  Arabic,^  for  a  repre- 
sentative character,  so  LXX.  and  Vulg.  "  Ecclesiastes,"  Luth. 
"Prediger,"  A.  R.  "preacher,"  R.  Mg.  "great  orator."^  Less 
probable  explanations  are  "collector  (of  wise  sayings),"  "caller 
of  assemblies,"  "  debater."  ^  Unsuccessful  attempts  have 
been  made  to  show  that  Qoheleth  is  a  cryptogram  for 
Solomon. 

(b)  Date  and  Authorship. — The  language  belongs  to  the 
latest  stage  of  biblical  Hebrew;  Aramaic  words  are  used.^ 
The  vocabulary  and  idioms  have  much  in  common  with  the 

^   VK0.phv  d6TT]V. 

*  Cf.  also  iii.  34,  Jas.  iv.  6,  i.  Pet.  v.  5  ;  jd.  31,  i.  Pet.  iv.  18 ;  xxv.  21, 
Rom.  xii.  20;  xxvi.  11,  ii.  Pet.  ii.  22.  *  i.  Cor.  i.  24. 

*  viii.  22,  LXX. ;  Heb.  qdtidnt,  A.  R.  "  possessed,"  R.  Mg.  "formed." 

*  Palmer,  Arab.  Gram.,  p.  53. 

*  Cf.  the  masc.  names  Sophereth  =  scx\hQ  (fern.),  Mokhertth ^stWtx 
(fern.),  Ezra  ii.  55  fF.  '  Plumptre. 

^  e.g.y  2'wfl«, * '  time,"  only  elsewhere  in  O.T.,  in  Neh.,  Esther,  and  the 
Aramaic  section  of  Daniel. 


ECCLESIASTES  i6i 

post-biblical  Hebrew  of  the  Mishna,  etc.^;  some  idioms  in 
constant  use  in  biblical  Hebrew  are  rarely  or  never  used.^  A 
more  or  less  considerable  influence  of  Greek  upon  the  language 
of  Qoheleth  has  been  maintained  by  some  scholars,^  but  denied 
by  Cheyne.  The  language  points  to  a  date  in  the  Greek 
period,  or,  at  the  earliest,  at  the  end  of  the  Persian  period. 

The  historical  situation  is  not  clearly  defined,  but  we  gather 
that  the  Jews  are  oppressed  by  the  officers  of  an  alien  govern- 
ment.* Such  a  state  of  affairs  points  either  to  the  close  of 
the  Persian  period,  or  to  the  times  when  the  Ptolemies  and 
Seleucids  in  turn  ill-used  the  Jews,  before  the  revolt  of  the 
Maccabees. 

On  the  other  hand,  neither  the  situation  implied  nor  the 
depressed  tone  of  the  book  suit  the  stirring  period  of  the 
Maccabees. 

It  has  been  maintained  *  that  the  version  found  in  MSS.  of 
the  LXX.  is  that  of  Aquila;  but,  in  any  case,  the  history  of 
the  LXX.  is  too  little  known  to  afford  much  help  in  fixing  the 
date  of  this  book. 

The  theology  of  the  book  also  points  to  a  late  post-exilic 
date.  The  temple  worship  is  assiduously  observed,  but  a  time 
has  come  when  men  can  regard  it  with  a  languid  approval 
which  affords  them  little  comfort.  The  eager  enthusiasm  and 
fierce  controversy  of  Ezra's  time  seem  long  since  to  have  died 
away,  and  something  of  the  well-bred  indifference  of  the 
Sadducee  has  crept  over  men's  souls.  This  again  would  suit 
the  Greek  period. 

Qoheleth  has  parallels  with  Greek  philosophy,^  which  are 

^  e.g.,  k'bhdr,  "already"  (seven  times),  nowhere  else  in  O.T.,  but  used 
in  Mishna ;  and  the  use  of  she  and  shel^  alone  or  with  prepositions,  for  the 
Heb.  'dsher. 

'  With  three  exceptions,  the  Per£  with  Simple  Waw  is  used  for  the 
Imperf.  with  Waw  Consec. 

3  Gratz,  etc.,  ap.  Chkyne,/^3,  etc.,  p.  260;  Tyler,  Wildkboer. 
An  example  is  the  alleged  use  oi ydpheh^  "fair,"  in  the  ethical  sense  of 
/raX6s,  especially  in  the  phrase  tdbh  'Asher  ydpheh,  v.  17,  "good  which  is 
fair,"  said  to  equal  the  /caXds  Kdyados.  *  V.  8f. 

•  Gratz,  rejected  by  Dillmann  ;  ap.  Wildeboer. 

«  Plumptre,  £ccI,  etc. ;  Tyler. 


i62  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

sometimes  supposed  to  indicate  dependence,  either  on 
Epicurus,  as  is  suggested  by  the  numerous  statements  that 
the  only  attainable  happiness  lies  in  the  reasonable  enjoy- 
ment of  the  good  things  of  this  life ;  or  on  the  Stoics,  whose 
doctrine  of  recurring  cycles  is  parallel  to  i.  2-1 1,  and  of 
Determinism  to  iii. ;  or  on  HeracUtus  ^  in  such  passages  as 
iii.  1-8.  Certainly  the  book  has  much  of  the  Stoic  temper, 
and  less  than  the  Stoic  faith,  and  the  many  parallels  are  most 
easily  explained  by  some  influence,  direct  or  indirect,  of 
Greek  thought,  but  it  might  not  be  impossible  to  explain 
the  book  as  an  independent  development  of  Hebrew  thought.^ 

While,  therefore,  the  possibility  of  a  date  at  the  close  of  the 
Persian  period  ^  cannot  be  positively  excluded,  the  weight  of 
the  evidence  is  in  favour  of  about  B.C.  200.* 

It  follows  that  the  ascription  to  Solomon,^  like  that  of  the 
book  of  Daniel  to  Daniel,  is  a  mere  literary  form,  which  the 
author  is  not  very  careful  to  maintain.^  But  although,  with 
few  exceptions,*^  the  Solomonic  authorship  was  universally 
accepted  till  towards  the  end  of  last  century,  even  in  1881 
Dean  Plumptre  wrote,  "  No  one  now  dreams  of  ascribing  it  to 
Solomon."  ^  There  are  still,  however,  some  works  in  circula- 
tion which  maintain  the  traditional  view.^ 

1  Pfleiderkr,  ap.  Wildeboer. 

*  CHEYNE,yi»3,  etc.,  271,  *'Ido  not  see  that  we  must  admit  even  a 
vague  Greek  influence."  Dillon,  Sceptics  of  O.T.^  sees  Buddhist  in- 
fluence in  xii.  7,  the  reabsorption  of  the  spirit  into  the  Divine. 

3  So  EvvALD,  Delitzsch,  ap.  Cheyne,  Keil,  Eng.  Trans.,  i.  518, 

C.  B.C.  444. 

*  Cheyne,  Job,  etc.,  p.  271,  Cornill,  Driver,  Kayser-Marti, 
p.  191,  Kautzsch,  Bibel,  c.  B.C.  250?;  Plumptre,  Smend,  A.T.  TheoL, 
Greek  period,  p.  526,  Tyler,  Konig,  Alex.  Jannoeus,  e.c.  104-78; 
Gratz,  Herod  the  Great,  B.C.  39-4. 

*  Solomon  is  not  named,  but  the  wise,  wealthy  son  of  David,  king  over 
Israel  in  Jerusalem,  can  be  no  one  else. 

'  e.g.,  the  phrase  "all,"  i.e.,  apparently,  all  the  kings  of  Israel  "that 
were  before  me  in  Jerusalem,"  i.  16,  ii.  7,  9. 

'  Luther,  Grotius,  etc.,  ap.  Plumptre,  p.  23. 

*  EccL  ^.  21,  cf.  Oxford  Helps ^  "The  book  was  formerly  supposed  to 
have  been  written  by  Solomon." 

"  Principal  DouGLAS  in  notes  inserted  in  his  translation  of  Keil's 
Jntrod.,  1871 ;  Rev.  W.  T.  Bullock,  m.a.,  in  the  Speaker's  Com- 
mentary. 


ECCLESIASTES  163 

As  to  place  of  composition,  the  data  are  indefinite;  it  is 
commonly  placed  in  Judaea,^  but  also  at  Alexandria.^ 

(c)  Composition. — Apart  from  the  first  two  chapters,  the 
book  is,  as  Cheyne  says,^  "  rough  "  and  "  disjointed."  "  The 
thread  of  thought  seems  to  break  every  few  verses  ...  the 
feelings  and  opinions  embodied  in  the  book  are  often  mutually 
inconsistent."  The  theories  framed  to  account  for  these  facts 
may  be  grouped  thus : 

(i.)  That  the  book  was  written  as  it  stands,  and  that  the 
lack  of  coherence  and  consistency  either  reflect  the  un- 
certainty and  varying  moods  of  the  author,  as  in  Tennyson's 
Two  Voices^^  or  that  the  book  contains  a  kind  of  report  of 
the  discussions  of  a  religious  academy,^  or  that  the  more 
sceptical  passages  are  the  sayings  of  an  infidel  objector,  quoted 
to  be  refuted. 

(ii.)  That  the  lack  of  order  is  due  either  to  an  accident 
to  the  MS.  by  which  leaves  were  transposed,^  or  to  the  fact 
that  iii.-xii.  were  compiled  from  loose  notes  of  the  author's 
after  his  death.''  This  view  would  explain  the  presence  of 
the  collection  of  proverbs. 

(iii.)  That  the  confusion  arises  from  omissions  and  inter- 
polations made  by  editors  to  correct  the  sceptical  tone  of 
the  book.  This  view  is  supported  by  the  probable  analogy 
of  Job. 

The  epilogues,  xii.  9-14,  especially  13  f.,  are  often  regarded 
as  additions.^  They  certainly  read  like  a  subscription  by  a 
later  hand,  cf,  John  xxi.  24  f. ;  and  13  f.  seems  to  contradict 
the  teaching  of  many  passages  of  the  book.     The  rejection, 

1  NowACK,  p.  197,  Cheyne,  p.  258,  Tyler,  p.  63. 

'  Plumptre,  p.  39.  ^  Joby  etc.,  p.  204. 

4  NowACK,  Plumptre,  Wildeboer.     ^  Tyler. 

*  BiCKELL,  who  also  holds  that  there  are  important  editorial  additions, 
e.g.  all  the  passages  implying  authorship  by  Solomon.  Naturally  additions 
would  be  made  in  the  attempt  to  construct  a  coherent  whole  out  of  the 
jumbled  leaves. 

'  Cheyne, yi?^,  etc.,  p.  204. 

8  BicKELL,  Cheyne, /<7^  etc.,  p.  234,  Nowack,  Plumptre,  p.  101. 
xii.  8-14  are  accepted  by  Tyler  and  Wildeboer. 


i64  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

however,  of  this  section  carries  with  it  that  of  the  other 
"  B  "  passages.!  The  difficulty  as  to  13  f.  is  not  that  its 
teaching  is  necessarily  incompatible  with  the  rest  of  the 
book  ;  in  face  of  all  appearances  to  the  contrary,  Qoheleth, 
like  Job,  may  have  clung  to  his  faith  in  God's  righteousness. 
But  13  f.  is  7iot  "the  sum  of  the  matter"  either  as  a  summary 
of  the  book,  or  of  Qoheleth's  feehngs  as  to  the  subject ;  nor 
is  it  easy  to  understand  how  the  author  of  the  A  passages^ 
would  have  spoken  with  the  assured  certainty  of  the  B 
passages  as  to  God's  judgments.  Was  he  able  to  take,  at 
one  and  the  same  time,  Job's  attitude  and  that  of  Job's 
friends,  without  having  any  suggestion  to  oflfer  as  to  how 
they  were  to  be  reconciled.  The  simplest  theory  of  the  book 
seems  to  be  the  last  (iii.).^ 

An  interesting  variety  of  this  theory  supposes  that  the 
Epilogue  was  added  at  the  Synod  of  Jamnia,  a.d.  90,  to 
adapt  Ecclesiastes  for  reception  into  the  Canon,  and  to 
formally  close  the  Canon  of  the  Hagiographa;  12a  is 
translated:  "As  for  more  than  these,"  />.,  the  canonical 
books,  "beware,  my  son;  of  making  many  books  there  is 
no  end." 

(d)  Contents. — Ecclesiastes  contains  material  of  three  kinds : 
(A)  an  exposition  of  the  vanity  of  life  and  its  practical  con- 
sequences ;  (B)  notes  enforcing  ordinary  religious  views ;  (C) 
proverbs  of  a  purely  general  character,  which  might  just  as 
well  have  been  included  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs.  There 
is  no  widely  accepted  view  as  to  the  principle  on  which  the 
book  has  been  arranged,  and  the  various  materials  com- 
bined. 

Ai,  i.,  ii.,  Vanity  of  human  life  in  the  ever-recurring  cycles 
of  existence.  Vanity  of  all  things,  of  wealth  and  luxury, 
wisdom  and  toil.  Yet  it  is  well  to  enjoy  life  as  well  as  we 
may. 

[Bi,    ii.    26a,   God  rewards  whom  He  pleases,  and 
punishes  the  sinner. 

1  See  (d). 

'  Dr.  Paul  Haupt  translates  xii.  12a:  "And  it  might  be  well  to 
add :  my  son,  be  on  your  guard  against  these  (sayings).' 


ECCLESIASTES  165 

Also  understood^   as   a   statement   of    God's 
arbitrary    choice    of    one    man    for    good    and 
another  for  ill-fortune;  "sinner"  meaning  merely 
"man."     If  so  the  sentence  belongs  to  Ai.] 
A2,  iii.-vi.,  All  things  have  their  season.     Vanity  of  specu- 
lation, of  life  under  oppression, 

[B2,  iii.  17,  God  shall  judge  all  men.] 
or  in  solitude.     Vanity  of  superstitious  worship,  of  avarice. 
It  is  well  to  enjoy  life,  such  as  it  is. 

A3,  vii.  i-viii.  15,  A  commendation  of  a  sedate  life,  as 
cheerful  as  may  be,  in  face  of  the  emptiness  and  weariness 
of  all  things. 

[B3,  vii.  26b,  viii.  12  f.,  God  shall  reward  the  good  and 
punish  the  wicked.] 
A4,  viii.  i6-ix.  i6.  All  that  man's  wisdom  can  see  is  that 
"All  things  come  alike  to  all";  there  is  no  moral  discrimi- 
nation or  intelligible  purpose  manifest  in  the  government  of 
the  world.  It  is  well  to  enjoy  life,  as  far  as  may  be,  for 
wisdom  is  a  barren  gift. 

[C,  ix.  17-X.  20,  Collection  of  Proverbs.] 
A5,  xi.  i-xii.  8,  We  must  labour  in  spite  of  uncertainty  as 
to  results.    Let  a  man  make  the  most  of  youth,  before  growing 
years  deprive  him  of  his  faculties. 

[B4,  xi.  9b,  xii.  I,  God  will  judge  life,  therefore  let  the 

young  man  be  mindful  of  his  Creator.^ 
B5,  xii.  7,  Man's  dust  returns  to  dust,  his  spirit  to 

God.3 
B6,  xii.  9-14,  Epilogue  stating  that  the  author's 
intentions  were  good,  that  undue  speculation  is 
dangerous,  and  that  the  sum  of  the  matter  is  that 
the  whole  duty  of  man  is  to  fear  God,  because  He 
will  judge  all  things.] 

1  WiLDEBOKR. 

'  For  "thy  Creator,"  bdra'akhd,  P.  Haupt,  etc.  read  bdr^khd,  "thy 
well"  understood  as  a  figure  for  "wife."     If  so  xii.  i  belongs  to  A 5. 

'  Referring  to  Genesis  ii.  7.  The  "spirit"  is  not  man's  personality, 
but  the  divine  breath,  which  God  resumes.  Similar  statements  are  made 
of  the  beasts,  Psalm  civ.  29,  Job  xxxiv.  14  f.  Even  so  this  verse  contradicts 
iii.  20. 


i66  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(e)  Teaching. — The  importance  of  Ecclesiastes  lies  in  its 
exposition  of  the  vanity  of  life.  Following  up  the  assaults  of 
Job,  Ecclesiastes  deals  the  last  fatal  blow  to  the  popular 
doctrine  of  retribution.  This  doctrine  traced  the  divine 
approval  or  condemnation  in  material  prosperity  and  suffer- 
ing. Job  showed  that  this  could  only  be  maintained  by  a 
brutally  cynic  judgment  upon  all  (apparently)  good  men  over- 
taken by  suffering.  But  Qoheleth  shows  that  this  material 
prosperity  itself,  wealth,  power,  luxury,  wisdom,  long  life,  is 
"  vanity  of  vanities  " ;  how  then  can  it  be  the  sign  of  God's 
approval?  Further  he  scarcely  seems  to  have  gone,  but  to 
have  brought  the  matter  to  this  point,  cleared  the  way  for 
another  question :  "  How  can  the  absence  of  material  pros- 
perity be  the  token  of  God's  disapproval  ?  "  Again,  Qoheleth 
ignored,  and  therefore  probably  rejected,  the  doctrine  of  a 
resurrection,  which  we  know  was  already  current  in  his  time. 
But  this  limitation  of  his  faith  enabled  him  to  set  forth,  with 
unique  emphasis,  the  truth  that  man's  present  life,  considered 
by  itself,  is  unworthy  alike  of  God  and  man.  Such  an  ex- 
position is  a  conclusive  argument  for  a  future  life. 

The  passages  added  to  declare  the  certainty  of  divine 
judgment,  present  to  us  faith,  whether  author's  or  editor's, 
persisting  in  the  face  of  overwhelming  difficulties. 

For  us  Ecclesiastes  has  two  main  lessons,  both  of  which  it 
shares  with  the  Book  of  Job.  First,  that  the  frank  utterance 
and  discussion  of  objections  to  faith  may  be  inspired  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  even  when  the  utterer  can  only  show  grounds  for 
doubts,  and  cannot  resolve  them.  Secondly,  and  more  par- 
ticularly, in  th6  supposed  interests  of  God's  benevolence  and 
justice,  and  in  order  to  emphasise  sin  and  responsibility, 
religious  teachers  are  constantly  tempted  to  ignore 

".  .  .  .  the  weight  of  care. 
That  crushes  into  dumb  despair 
One  half  the  human  race." 

The  presence  of  Qoheleth  in  the  Canon  of  O.T.  Revelation 
reminds  us  that  God's  sympathy  with  His  suffering  creation  is 


SONG  OF  SONGS  167 

wider  and  deeper  than  we  are  sometimes  taught;  its  logical 
sequel  is  the  sacrifice  of  Christ. 

(f)  Use  in  N,T, — There  is  no  evidence  that  any  N.T.  writers 
were  acquainted  with  Ecclesiastes,  unless  we  accept  Dr.  Paul 
Haupt's  suggestion  that  "Luke  xii.  22-34  .  .  .  (like  Psalm 
cxxvii.)  is  evidently  directed  against  Ecclesiastes."^ 

(g)  Canonicity. — The  right  of  Ecclesiastes  to  a  place  in  the 
Jewish  canon  was  long  contested,  but  was  officially  conceded 
by  the  Synod  of  Jamnia,  a.d.  90.  The  church,  as  in  many 
other  matters,  simply  adopted  the  decision  of  the  Rabbis. 

5.  Song  of  Songs. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship,— ^\iQ  title,  "  The  Song  of  Songs, 
which  is  Solomon's,"  may  merely  mean  that  it  is  about 
Solomon;  if  it  is  intended  to  assert  authorship,  it  is  merely 
a  late  conjecture  suggested  by  the  contents,  like  so  many  of 
the  Psalm  titles.  Solomonic  authorship  is  now  very  generally 
rejected.  The  language  has  some  striking  characteristics  of 
the  latest  period  of  Hebrew,^  which  point  to  a  date  at  the 
close  of  the  Persian  period,  or  even  later.^ 

These  linguistic  peculiarities,  however,  are  often  explained 
by  supposing  that  Canticles  was  written  in  the  dialect  of 
Northern  Israel.  The  mention  of  Tirzah,  the  capital  of  that 
kingdom,  before  Omri  built  Samaria,^  has  also  been  held  to 
support  a  pre-exilic  date.  There  is  every  probability  that  the 
language  of  Northern  Israel  had  dialectic  peculiarities,  but 
there  is  not  sufficient  evidence  to  establish  the  unlikely  theory 
that  these  peculiarities  coincided  with  those  of  the  latest  stage 
of  the  Hebrew  language.  These  are  entirely  absent  from  the 
one  O.T.   document,  which   certainly   belongs  to   Northern 

*  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Circ. ,  No.  89. 

'  The  use  of  the  prefix  sh  for  'dsher^  of  Shel;  the  occurrence  of  the 
Vtxs\d.n  pardes,  park,  iv.  13,  cf.  Neh.  ii.  8,  Eccl.  ii.  5 ;  and  of  ^appirydn, 
perhaps  •=■  Greek  phoreion. 

'  BuDDE,  2nd  or  3rd  century  B.C.  ;  Cheyne,  Founders  O.T.  Crit.y 
p.  351  f.;  CORNILL,  not  earlier  than  Persian  period;  Kautzsch,  B.C.  332  ?; 
koNiG,  early  post-exilic  period  ;  Strack,  Persian  period. 

*  vi.  4,  cf.  i.  Kings  xvi.  23  f.,  also  mentioned  in  ii.  Kings  xv.  14,  16. 


i68  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Israel,  the  Book  of  Hosea.  The  significance  of  Tirzah — 
pleasantness — would  suggest  its  use  as  a  type  of  beauty; 
Tirzah  is  used  as  a  woman's  name  in  the  Priestly  Code,^  and, 
if  Tirzah  be  the  flourishing  modern  town  of  Tulluzah,^  it  may 
have  been  important  enough  in  the  post-exile  period  to  be 
coupled  with  Jerusalem. 

(b)  Canonicity. — The  status  of  Canticles  was  matter  of  con- 
troversy amongst  the  Jews  until  the  Synod  of  Jamnia,  a.d.  90, 
when  it  was  definitely  received  into  the  Canon.  Yet,  even  in 
the  second  century,  parts  of  it  were  trolled  out^  in  the  wine- 
shops as  drinking  songs.  The  Church,  as  usual,  endorsed  the 
decision  of  the  Rabbis.  There  is  no  doubt  that  it  became 
canonical  alike  among  Jews  and  Christians  on  the  understand- 
ing that  it  was  to  be  used  as  an  allegory.  The  heading  in  the 
Peshitto  Syriac,  "  Wisdom  of  Wisdoms,"  points  to  this  view  of 
the  book.  The  defenders  of  the  dramatic  theory  justify  its 
inclusion  in  the  Canon  as  a  panegyric  on  virtuous  love. 

The  book  is  not  referred  to  in  the  N.T. 

(c)  Contents  and  Interpretation. — Canticles  contains  a  collec- 
tion of  poems  concerning  the  mutual  affection  of  two  lovers. 
It  has  been  variously  understood  as : — 

(i.)  An  Allegory ;  among  the  Jews,  of  Jehovah's  love  for 
Israel,  by  Christians  of  Christ's  love  for  His  Church,  as  in  the 
headings  in  A.V.*  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the 
original  author  intended  the  book  for  an  allegory. 

(ii.)  A  Drama ;  with  a  full  equipment  of  dramatis  personae, 
lovers,  ladies  of  the  harem,  first  and  second  citizens,  villagers, 
etc.  This  theory  has  been  held  in  different  forms,  of  which 
there  are  two  chief  varieties,  (i)  The  drama  depicts  the 
loves  of  Solomon  and  one  of  his  queens,^  the  Shulamite, 
Solomon  assuming  at  times  the  character  of  a  shepherd. 
Thus,  i.   i-iii.  5,  Courtship;  iii.  6-v.  i,  Marriage;  v.  2-vi.  9, 

1  Num.  xxxvi.  II,  etc. 

2  G.  A.  Smith,  Hist.  Geog.,  p.  355. 

3  TrdlUrt,  BuDDE,  Cant,  x.,  quoting  Tosephta  Sanhedrin  xii. 

*  Kril,  O.T.  Introd.^  Eng.  Trans.,  i.  503. 

*  DfiLITZSCH. 


SONG  OF  SONGS  169 

Domestic  Difficulties;  vi.  lo-vii.  9,  Mutual  Satisfaction;  vii. 
lo-end,  the  Shulamite  takes  Solomon  to  visit  her  home  and 
family.  (2)  The  drama  has  three  main  characters,  the  Shula- 
mite, a  shepherd,  to  whom  she  is  betrothed,  and  Solomon, 
who  attempts  to  win  her  affections.^  Thus,  i.  i-vii.  9,  the 
Shulamite,  in  the  harem,  combats  the  persuasions  of  Solomon 
and  his  womenfolk  by  the  help  of  her  reminiscences  of  her 
shepherd  lover ;  vii.  lo-viii.  4,  Final  Rejection  of  Solomon  in 
favour  of  the  Shepherd;  viii.  5-14,  Happy  Reunion  of  the 
Shulamite  and  the  Shepherd. 

According  to  this  view,  the  book  is  in  praise  of  pure 
conjugal  affection. 

(iii.)  An  Epithalamium ;  the  book  is  a  collection  of  songs, 
connected  with  a  Syrian  custom,  called  the  "  King's  Week." 
During  the  first  week  after  marriage  the  bride  and  bridegroom 
play  at  being  king  and  queen,  and  are  addressed  as  such  by  a 
mock  court,  in  a  series  of  songs  similar  to  those  of  Canticles. 
Thus  Canticles  would  contain  a  specimen  of  the  cycle  of 
songs  used  at  a  seven  days'  village  feast  in  honour  of  a 
peasant  bride  and  bridegroom,  the  latter  being  addressed  as 
"Solomon,"  the  type  of  a  splendid  and  powerful  king. 

Earlier  critics  had  suggested  that  the  book  was  a  collection 
of  songs,  but  this  particular  view  originated  in  J.  G.  Wetz- 
stein's  accounts  of  the  custom  sketched  above.  It  was 
accepted  and  developed  by  Carl  Budde  in  various  articles, 
and  in  his  commentary  on  Canticles  in  the  Kurzer  Hand 
Comm.  zum  A.T. ;  it  has  been  adopted  by  Cornill,  Kautzsch, 
etc. 

One  objection  to  (ii.)  and  (iii.) — the  absence  of  headings  is 
not  serious.  We  might  perhaps  have  expected  headings  to 
songs  constituting  a  collection,  and  should  certainly  look  for 
some  equivalent  of  our  list  of  dramatis  personae,  stage  direc- 
tions, etc.,  in  the  "  Book  of  the  Words  "  of  a  drama.  Yet,  in 
the  present  instance,  their  absence  is  not  difficult  to  under- 
stand ;  they  were  probably  removed  when  it  was  decided  that 

^  Adeney,  Davidson,  Driver,  Konig,  Smith,  W.R.,  etc.,  following 

EWALD. 


I70  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

the  book  was  to  be  regarded  as  an  allegory.  But  in  spite  of 
the  ingenuity  devoted  to  the  interpretation  of  the  book  as 
a  drama,  there  is  a  conspicuous  absence  of  what  we  should 
call  dramatic — the  story  does  not  tell  itself  at  all  clearly.  The 
dramatic  theory  moreover  is  not  supported  by  any  parallels  in 
ancient  Jewish  literature.  On  the  other  hand,  Budde's  theory 
(iii.)  affords  an  adequate  explanation  of  the  facts.  Possibly, 
however,  the  cycles  of  songs  used  at  village  nuptials  were 
supposed  to  tell  some  traditional  story  concerning  Solomon. 
We  need  not  suppose  that  actors  assumed  parts,  the  village 
chorus  spoke  in  turn  for  different  personages,  bride,  bride- 
groom, etc.  Moreover,  the  compiler  of  Canticles  may  have 
been  acquainted  with  and  used  different  cycles  of  songs,  so 
that  our  book  may  be  a  combination  of  two  or  more  such 
cycles,  or  more  probably  one  cycle  has  been  amplified  from 
others. 


CHAPTER  V. 
ISAIAH-DANIEL 


I. 

Our  Book  of  Isaiah,   with 

5.  Isaiah  xl.-Iv. 

General  Analysis. 

6.  Isaiah  Ivi.-lxvi 

2. 

Isaiah  i.-xxxv. 

7.  Jeremiah. 

3. 

Isaiah  xxxvi.-xxxix. 

8.  Lamentations. 

4- 

Introduction  to  Isaiah  xl.- 

9.  Ezekiel. 

Ixvi. 

10.  Daniel. 

I.  Our  Book  of  Isaiah,  with  General  Analysis. — Our 
present  Book  of  Isaiah  is  quoted  in  N.T.  times  under  the 
title  "Isaiah,"  but  it  is  not  certain  that  this  necessarily 
means  that  the  whole  book  throughout  was  written  by  Isaiah. 
The  earliest  trace  of  the  existence  of  our  book  in  its  present 
form  is  the  statement  in  Ecclesiasticus  xlviii.  23-25  that 
Isaiah  "comforted  them  that  mourned  in  Zion,^  etc."  The 
book  falls  into  five  main  sections :  (a)  i.-xii. ;  (b)  xiii.-xxiii. ; 
(c)  xxiv.-xxxv. ;  (d)  xxxvi.-xxxix. ;  (e)  xl.-lxvi.  The  present 
arrangement  suggests  that  (a),  (b),  (c)  are  separate  collections 
of  Isaianic  prophecies,  based  on  earlier  collections,  with 
additions.  As  some  of  these  additions,  in  each  case,  are 
post-exilic,  (a),  (b),  (c),  as  they  stand,  are  post-exilic;  (d)  is 
an  appendix,  added  by  an  editor  who  combined  (a),  (b),  (c), 
therefore  also  post-exilic.  Chapters  xl.  ff.  (e)  "  Second  Isaiah  " 
is  a  collection  of  exilic  and  post-exilic  prophecies ;  apparently, 
in  the  time  of  the  author  of  Ezra,  i.e.,  the  Chronicler,  this 
collection  was  not  attributed  to  Isaiah.  Both  collections, 
i.-xxxix.  and  xl.-lxvi.,  were  completed  after  the  Exile,  the 
exact  date  depends  on  the  view  taken  of  the  date  of  the 
latest  sections  contained  in  each.     It  cannot  be  earlier  than 

*  Isaiah  xl.  I. 
171 


172  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

c.  400.  The  final  combination  of  i.-xxxix.  and  xl.-lxvi.  was 
probably  accidental.  In  some  lists  Isaiah  stands  after 
Jeremiah,  Ezekiel.  If  Isaiah  i.-xxxix.  were  immediately 
followed  by  the  anonymous  book  xl.-lxvi.,  the  combination 
of  the  two,  under  the  title  Isaiah,  would  be  inevitable.  Cf. 
Zechariah. 

GENERAL  ANALYSIS 
(Arranged  according  to  Authorship). 
Isaiah  i.-xxxix. 
"First  Isaiah." 
(Sections  not  by  Isaiah  in  Italics.) 
i.-xi.  9,  Judah,  Ephraim,  Syria,  and  Assyria. 
xu  iQ-xiv.  23,  First  Group  of  Later  Additions, 
xiv.  24-xxiii.,  Oracles  on  the  Nations  (including,  however, 
the  older  fragments  in  xv..,  xvL^  and  the  post-exilic  xxi.  i-io). 
xxiv,-xxvii..,  Second  Group  of  Later  Additions. 
xxviii.-xxxii.,    Chastisement     by    and    Deliverance     from 
Assyria. 
xxxiii.-xxxv.^  Third  Group  of  Later  Additions, 
xxxvi.-xxxix.^  Historical  Appendix. 

Isaiah  xl.-lxvi. 
"Second  Isaiah." 
xl.-lv.,    " Deutero-Isaiah,^^    Exilic,   with    Servant   passages, 
xlii.   1-4  (5-7),  xlix.   1-6  (7-i3)>  ^.  4-9  (10.  "X  ^«-    13- 
////.  12. 

Ivi.-lxvi.,  "  Trito-Lsaiahy^  a  Collection  of  post-exilic  prophe- 
cies. 

2.  Isaiah  i.-xxzv. 

(a)  Lsaiah  and  His  Teaching.  —  Isaiah  ministered  at 
Jerusalem,  of  which  he  was  probably  a  native.  He  was 
married,  and  two  sons  were  born  to  him  during  his 
ministry.  He  ministered  for  more  than  forty  years,  from 
his  call  in  the  year  when  King  Uzziah  died,  c.  740,  till 
after  the  retreat  of  Sennacherib  in  701,  so  that  he  was 
born   under  Uzziah,  began    his-  ministry  as   a   young    man, 


ISAIAH    I.-XXXV.  173 

and  continued  it  to  old  age.  The  story  of  his  martyrdom 
under  Manasseh  cannot  be  traced  beyond  the  second  century 
A.D.  Like  Elisha  and  Jeremiah,  he  sought  to  control  the 
home  and  foreign  policy  of  the  government;  during  part 
of  Hezekiah's  reign  he  was  the  chief  power  in  the  state, 
and  probably  Hezekiah's  reformation  was  inspired  by  him. 
He  protested  steadily,  but  without  effect,  against  foreign 
alliances,  whether  with  Assyria  against  Syria  and  Israel,  or 
with  Egypt  against  Assyria.  Like  Amos,  Hosea,  and  Micah, 
he  denounced  the  faith  in  assiduous  and  often  superstitious 
and  even  idolatrous  worship  as  a  substitute  for  a  moral  life^ 
and  righteous  government,  and  foretold  the  ruin  of  Israel 
and  the  chastisement  of  Judah,  but  a  pious  remnant  of 
the  latter  should  be  saved.  These  doctrines  were  specially 
emphasised  by  the  names  of  his  sons,  "  Maher-shalal-hash- 
baz,"  "Hasten  booty,  speed  spoil,"  and  " Shear-jashub,"  "A 
remnant  shall  return."  When  it  seemed  that  Jerusalem  must 
be  sacked,  Isaiah  assured  Hezekiah  that  God  would  save 
His  chosen  city.  Isaiah  followed  Amos  in  recognising 
God's  control  of  foreign  nations  as  well  as  His  special 
interest  in  Israel,  one  application  being  that  Assyria  was 
the  rod  used  by  God  to  chastise  His  people,  and  that 
Assyria's  delusion  that  it  conquered  by  its  own  power  would 
be  severely  chastised. 

Isaiah  goes  far  towards  a  formal  statement  of  monotheism ; 
he  speaks  of  idols  as  ^elilim^  "nonentities,"  and  emphasises 
Jehovah's  holiness,  i.e.^  His  unique  deity,  and  His  glory,  ?>., 
His  manifestation  in  Nature.^ 

His  practical  teaching  is  largely  summed  up  in  his  own 

words : 

**  In  returning  and  rest  shall  ye  be  saved  j 
In  quietness  and  confidence  shall  be  your  strength."' 

Whether  Isaiah's  teaching  included  the  glowing  pictures 
of  the  Messianic  King,  the  Messianic  Era,  and  of  universal 

*  e.g.^  chapter  i.     He  does  not  expressly  attack  the  high  places. 
2  ii.  8,  20,  vi.,  and  the  favourite  phrase,  "the  Holy  One  of  Israel." 
»  XXX.  15,  cf,  vii.  4,  9. 


i;4  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

devotion  to  Jehovah,'  is  a  question  on  which  critics  are 
divided.  At  present  there  is  no  decisive  proof  that  such 
ideas  formed  no  part  of  Isaiah's  teaching. 

An  important  feature  of  his  ministry  was  his  formation  of 
a  group  of  disciples,  to  whom  he  devoted  himself,  when 
further  public  testimony  seemed  useless.^  Isaiah's  prophecies 
can  be  distributed  with  approximate  certainty  between  four 
periods:  the  years  before  the  Syro-Ephraimitic  War;  the 
Syro-Ephraimitic  War;  the  last  years  of  the  northern 
kingdom ;  the  revolt  against  Sennacherib  and  deliverance 
from  him.  To  us  this  deliverance  is  so  supremely  important, 
that  it  seems  the  natural  and  necessary  occasion  for  most 
of  the  prophecies  referring  to  Assyria;  but  the  scantiness 
of  our  data  leaves  it  possible  that  other  crises  seemed 
equally  important  to  those  who  lived  through  them.  Sub- 
ject to  this  doubt  we  may  group  the  acknowledged  sections 
thus^:— 

(i)  Before  the  Syro-Ephraimitic  Crisis,  ii.  5-iv.  i,  iv.  2-6, 
v.  1-24,  vi.,  ix.  8-x.  4  (  +  V.  25-30). 

(2)  In  connection  with  that  Crisis,  vii.  i-ix.  7,  xi.  1-9,* 
xvii.  i-ii. 

(3)  In  connection  with  the  Fall  of  Samaria,  xxviii.  1-6. 

(4)  Sargon's  Invasion,  711,  xx. 

(5)  In  connection  with  Sennacherib,  i.,  x.  5-24,  xiv.  24-27, 
28-32,  xviii.,  xxii.,  xxiii.,*  xxviii.  7-29,  xxix.,  xxx.,  xxxi. 

(6)  Later,  ii.  2-4,*  xxxii.* 

(7)  Uncertain,  mostly  723-701,  xv.,*  xvi.,*  xvii.  12-14,  xix.,* 
xxi.  13-17.* 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — Isaiah's  earlier  ministry  prob- 
ably coincided  with  the  last  years  of  Hosea,  cf.  Amos  (b), 
Hosea  (b).  The  position  which  Israel  had  attained  under 
Jeroboam  II.  was  already  seriously  impaired,  but  Judah  still 
enjoyed  great  prosperity.  This  was  threatened  by  the  joint 
attack  of  Rezin  and  Pekah,  against  whom  Ahaz  secured  the 

*  ii.  2-4,  ix.  2-7,  xi.  1-9,  xix.  16-25,  xxxii.  f. 

«  viii.  16-18.  «  Cf.  Contents.  <  If  Isaiah's. 


ISAIAH    I.-XXXV.  175 

help  of  Assyria.  Israel  was  invaded  in  succession  by  Tiglath- 
Pileser  III.,  Shalmaneser  IV.,  and  Sargon  II. ;  the  last  named 
took  Samaria  in  722-1 ;  in  720-19  he  marched  through 
Philistia  and  defeated  the  Egyptians  at  Raphia ;  later  on  he 
settled  colonies  from  the  East  in  Samaria,  and  in  711  he 
invaded  Palestine  and  took  Ashdod.  Sargon,  in  his  later  years, 
and  his  successor  Sennacherib  had  to  suppress,  by  arduous 
wars,  the  attempts  of  Merodach-Baladan  to  establish  an  in- 
dependent empire  at  Babylon.  After  Sennacherib's  accession 
Judah  joined  in  a  confederacy,  under  the  headship  of  Egypt, 
against  Assyria;  Sennacherib  invaded  Palestine,  defeated  the 
Egyptians  at  Eltekeh,  and  devastated  Judah.  When  Jerusalem 
was  at  its  last  extremity,  Sennacherib's  army  perished  by  divine 
judgment,  and  he  retreated  to  Assyria.  For  a  time  Judah  saw 
no  more  of  the  Assyrians,  but  Hezekiah's  successor,  Manasseh, 
became  tributary  to  them. 

(c)  Contents. 

I.  I -XI.  9,  First  Group  of  Isaiah's  Prophecies, 
Judah,  Ephraim,  Syria,  and  Assyria. 

i.,  General  introduction. 

I,  The  title  to  this  collection. 

Editorial,  the  words  "  concerning  Judah  and  Jerusalem  "  show  that  the 
collection  to  which  this  title  was  prefixed  did  not  include  the  Oracles  on 
foreign  nations,  and  was,  substantially,  our  i.-xi. 

2-31,  Judah  reduced  to  the  last  extremity  by  invasion,  be- 
cause of  ingratitude  to  Jehovah.  Forgiveness  is  not  to  be 
obtained  by  sacrifices,  but  by  repentance  and  amendment. 
The  doom  of  the  impenitent.     The  purified  city. 

This  invasion  has  been  identified  with  the  attack  of  Pekah  and  Rezin 
upon  Ahaz,  or  with  Sennacherib's  invasion  in  701.  The  chapter  may  be 
used  as  an  introduction,  because  of  its  representative  character.  It 
is  probably  a  compilation;  27,  28,  may  be  a  post-exilic  summary  of 
what  precedes;  29-31  are  a  detached  fragment  of  an  early  Isaianic 
utterance. 

ii.-v.,  Minor  collection  with  title. 
ii.  I,  Jerusalem,  its  judgment  and  final  destiny, 
ii.  2-4,  Jerusalem,  the  centre  of  revelation  for  all  nations  in 
the  Messianic  Era  of  universal  peace. 


i;r6  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTIOxN 

Occurs  also  as  Micah  iv.  1-3.  Probably  Isaiah  did  not  borrow  from 
Micah,  nor  Micah  from  Isaiah,  but  either  both  from  an  older  prophet,^  or 
the  section  may  be  a  post-exilic  insertion  in  both  Micah  and  Isaiah.^  Or 
an  editor  of  one  of  the  books  may  have  inserted  it  from  the  other.^ 

ii.  5-iv.  I,  The  doom  of  all  that  is  "  high  and  lifted  up,"  be- 
cause of  the  oppressions  of  the  rulers  and  the  wanton  luxury 
of  their  women. 

As  Judah  enjoys  great  prosperity,  this  section  is  earlier  than  the  Syro- 
Ephraimitic  War,  z>.,  c.  736.* 

iv.  2-6,  The  Remnant  restored  to  a  purified  Jerusalem. 
Parallels  with  post-exilic  literature  suggest  that  the  section  is  wholly 
(Cheyne)  or  partly  (Dillmann)  post-exilic. 

V.  1-7,  The  barren  vineyard  laid  waste. 

8-24,  Woes  against  sinners. 
1-24  parallel  to  previous  section,  and  so  c.  736. 

25-30,  Misplaced  fragment. 
Probably,  on  account  of  refrain  25b,  conclusion  of  ix.  8-x.  4,  where  it 
seems  required. 

vi.,  Isaiah's  call,  "in  the  year  that  King  Uzziah  died," 
c.  740,  Vision  of  Jehovah  and  the  Seraphim.  Commission  to 
apparently  fruitless  ministry.     The  Remnant  (?). 

The  chapter  may  have  been  committed  to  writing  later  on.  The  last 
clause,  "so  the  holy  seed  is  the  stock  thereof,"  is  rejected  by  some.'  If 
omitted,  the  ruin  is  complete  and  final,  there  is  no  remnant. 

vii.  i-ix.  7,  Narratives  and  utterances  connected  with  the 
war  with  Syria  and  Ephraim,  c.  734. 

vii.,®  Isaiah  tries  to  dissuade  Ahaz  from  alliance  with 
Assyria,  the  birth  of  Immanuel  a  sign  of  the  ruin  of  Syria 
and  Ephraim,  Assyria  will  become  the  scourge  of  Judah. 

8b,  "  Ephraim  shall  be  broken  within  65  years,  etc.,  is  a  later  gloss.' 

viii.  1-4,^  Isaiah's  son,  Maher-shalal-hash-baz,  a  sign  of  the 
ruin  of  Samaria  and  Damascus. 

viii.  S-15,  Jehovah  punishes  by  an  Assyrian  invasion. 

1  Driver,  etc.,  ap.  Cheyne,  Introd.  to  Isaiah^  p.  13. 

*  Cheyne,  Isaiah,  Polychrome  Bible,  p.  147. 

*  So  apparently  Duhm,  /./.,  who  thinks  the  passage  composed  by 
Isaiah  in  his  old  age. 

*  Possible  editorial  additions  are  ii.  5,  6a,  20-22,  iii.  10,  ii,  19-23  (list 
of  toilette  articles),  25,  26. 

*  Cheyne,  Duhm,  H.  G.  Mitchell.        ®  In  third  person. 

?  Cheyne  and  Duhm  reject  21-25.  •  Ch»  viii.  in  first  person. 


ISAIAH    I.-XXXV.  177 

viii.  16-18,  Isaiah  is  to  await  the  fulfilment  of  his  warnings. 

viii.    19-ix.    7,    In  the   last  extremity  deliverance  comes 

through  the  "  Wonderful  Counsellor,  Mighty  God,  Everlasting 

Father,  Prince  of  Peace." 

viii.  19-ix.  I,  is  obscure,  and  is  probably  a  disconnected  fragment  with 
editorial  additions.  Cheyne^  concludes  that  Hackmann  is  probably  right 
in  regarding  the  Messianic  passage  ix.  2-7  as  post-exilic* 

ix.  8-x.  4  (  +  v.  25-30),  a  poem  in  five  strophes,  with  re- 
frains, on  the  doom  of  Ephraim,  before  735. 
ix.  15,  16,  X.  3,  may  be  glosses.' 
X.  5-34,  On  Assyria  and  Judah. 

X.  5-27,  Doom  of  Assyria,  the  axe  with  which  Jehovah 
hewed,  because  it  boasted  itself  against  Him. 

x.  28-34,  Picture  of  the  dismay  caused  by  the  advance  of 

the  Assyrians. 

The  former  refers  to  Sennacherib's,  701,  or  some  earlier  Assyrian 
invasion  ;  the  latter  to  either,  or  to  the  fears  inspired  by  the  Fall  of 
Samaria,  722.* 

xi.  1-9,  The  Righteous  King,  or  Messiah,  in  whose  time 

even  the  wild  beasts  will  be  at  peace  with  man  and  his 

domestic  animals. 

May  be  referred  to  c.  734,  like  ix.  2-7,  which  it  resembles,  or,  if 
regarded  as  the  sequel  to  the  preceding  section,  to  the  same  period  as  x. 
According  to  Cheyne,  post-exilic.^ 

XI.  lo-XIV.  23,  First  Group  of  Sections  not  by  Isaiah. 
xi.    10-16,  The  exiles  of  Israel  and  Judah  will  be  again 

united  into  a  single   people,  will  return,  and  conquer  the 

neighbouring  tribes. 

This  passage,  which  implies  that  Judah  as  well  as  Israel  has  been  carried 
away  captive,  is  often  placed  during  "  or  after  ^  the  Exile. 

^  Introd.y  p.  45. 

2  Cy.  §  on  Teaching  of  Isaiah^  p.  172;  cf.  Kayser-Marti,  A.T. 
Theol,  115,  183  ff. 

3  DuHM,  Cheyne,  Mitchell  ;  Duhm  and  Cheyne  read  x.  4a,  "Beltis 
has  sunk  down,  Osiris  is  broken,  and  under  the  slain  they  fall,"  which 
Cheyne  regards  as  a  gloss. 

*  Cheyne,  Duhm,  and  Mitchell  reject  10-13,  16-27,  33,  34. 

5  Polychrome  Bible.  *  Kautzsch,  Bibel, 

'  Cheyne,  Polychrome  Bible^  and  Mitchell,  cf.  Skinner, 


178  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

The  reference  to  "  the  Root  of  Jesse  "  suggests  that  it  was  written  as  an 
appendix  to  the  preceding. 

xii.,  Psalm  of  praise,  appended  as  Epilogue  to  the  First 
Collection  of  Isaiah's  prophecies. 

Very  generally  ^  regarded  as  post-exilic  on  account  of  close  resemblance 
to  late  Psalms  and  other  post-exilic  literature. 

xiii.  i-xiv.  23,  Introduction  to  Isaiah's  Oracles  against  the 
Nations ;  Fall  of  Babylon,  Restoration  of  the  Jews,  Descent  of 
the  King  of  Babylon  into  Sheol. 

The  Israelites  in  exile,  the  captives  of  Babylon,  are  to  be  restored  after 
the  capture  of  Babylon  by  the  Medes,'^  a  situation  which  implies  composi- 
tion during  the  Exile.' 

XIV.  24-XXIII.  18,  Second  Group  of  Isaiah's  Prophe- 
cies.   Oracles  against  the  Nations. 

xiv.  24-27,  Assyria  to  be  destroyed  in  Judah. 

Perhaps  the  conclusion  of  x.  5-15,  if  so,  722-701. 

xiv.  28-32,  Philistines  to  be  destroyed  by  Assyria. 

The  title,  "In  the  year  that  King  Ahaz  died,"  is  probably  editorial, 
and  the  breaking  of  the  rod,  which  raised  the  hopes  of  the  Philistines, 
was  the  death  of  an  Assyrian  king,  either  Shalmaneser  IV.,  722,  or 
Sargon,  705. 

XV.,  xvi.,  Moab,  a  description,  on  the  whole  sympathetic, 
of  the  desolation  of  Moab  and  its  cities  by  an  invader. 
The  Moabite  fugitives  are  recommended  to  make  their  peace 
with  Judah  and  take  refuge  there. 

These  chapters  have  numerous  parallels  with  Jeremiah  xlviii.,  and  are 
similar  in  style  to  the  Song  in  Numbers  xxi.  27-30.  As  they  are  not 
in  the  style  of  Isaiah,  it  is  commonly  supposed  that  both  Isaiah  and 
Jeremiah  adapted  an  earlier  prophecy,  possibly  written  when  Moab 
was  threatened  by  Jeroboam  II.  In  xvi.  13,  14  Isaiah  announces  the 
fulfilment  in  the  near  future  of  the  time  of  writing,  ?.^.,  before  one  of 
the  Assyrian  invasions. 

Cheyne,  Polychrome  Bible,  regards  the  section  in  its  present  form  as 
post-exilic,  hesitates  whether  to  ascribe  the  original  to  722  or  589. 
Isaiah's  share,  his  additions  to  an  older  poem,  or  fragments  of  his  used  by 
a  later  writer,  are  dated  711  ;  xvi.  14  is  the  only  part  printed  as  Isaiah's. 

xvii.  i-ii,  Ruin  of  Damascus  and  Samaria. 
Period  of  Syro-Ephraimitic  War,  c.  734.     According  to  Cheyne  and 
Duhm,  7  f ,  an  addition  ;  Skinner,  an  addition  by  Isaiah. 

xvii.  12-14,  The  Assyrian  invasion,  a  tempest  which  shall 
suddenly  pass  away. 

Which  invasion  uncertain,  Cheyne,  723. 

^  Lists  in  Cheyne,  Introduction,  59,  Driver,  200. 

•  xiii.  17,  xiv.  2-4,  *  Driver,  Introduction,  201  f. 


ISAIAH    I.-XXXV.  179 

xviii.,  The  overthrow  of  the  Assyrians  announced  to  the 
Ethiopian  ambassadors  to  Assyria,  c.  701. 

Cheyne  and  Duhm  regard  7.  "  At  that  time  Ethiopia  shall  be  offered  at 
Zion  to  Jehovah,"  as  post-exilic. 

xix.,  Egypt,  1-15,  Jehovah  stirs  up  civil  war,  makes  the 
rulers  mad,  dries  up  the  Nile,  and  delivers  the  land  to  a 
"hard  lord." 

The  "  hard  lord  "  is  commonly  regarded  as  an  Assj^ian  conqueror,  and 
the  passage  has  been  connected  with  the  defeat  of  the  Egyptians  by 
Sargon  in  720  ;  with  Sargon's  war  against  the  Syrian  allies  of  Egypt  in 
711  ;  with  Sennacherib's  defeat  of  the  Egyptians  at  Eltekeh,  701  ;  with 
Esarhaddon's  conquest  of  Egypt,  672.  There  is  nothing,  however,  in 
the  passage  itself  to  suggest  Assyria  or  the  imminence  of  a  foreign 
invasion.  Jehovah  Himself  turns  the  natural  blessings  of  Egypt,  its 
king,  rulers,  and  the  Nile,  into  curses,  the  "hard  lord"  is  probably 
a  native  tyrant.  Such  might  naturally  be  an  utterance  of  Isaiah,  after 
the  retreat  of  Sennacherib  seemed  to  have  put  an  end  to  Assyrian 
invasions ;  Egypt  might  be  safe  from  the  Assyrians,  and  yet  not  escape 
chastisement  J 

16-25,  The  Conversion  of  Egypt,  Egypt  humbled  under 
the  hand  of  Jehovah,  will  stand  in  awe  of  Judah.  There 
shall  be  in  Egypt  five  cities,  one  Ir-ha-heres,  which  shall 
speak  the  language  of  Canaan;  also  an  altar  and  pillar 
(ma99eba)  to  Jehovah.  The  Egyptians  shall  worship  Him. 
Verses  23-25  rank  Egypt  and  Assyria  with  Israel  as  the 
Chosen  People:  "Whom  Jehovah  Sabaoth  shall  bless,  saying, 
Blessed  be  Egypt  my  people,  and  Assyria  the  work  of  my 
hands,  and  Israel  mine  inheritance." 

Of  this  wonderful  prophecy,  Robertson  Smith  wrote  :  "Never  had  the 
faith  of  prophet  soared  so  high,  or  approached  so  near  to  the  conception  of 
a  universal  religion,  set  free  from  every  trammel  of  national  individuality"; 
and,  "The  allusion  to  the  consecrated  ma99eba  is  quite  inconsistent  with  a 
date  subsequent  to  the  reformation  of  Josiah,  and  the  accepance  of  the 
Deuteronomic  law  of  worship."  ^  His  judgment  in  favour  of  Isaiah's 
authorship  of  this  section  is  still  strongly  supported.^  But  there  are  serious 
difficulties,  in  the  style  and  language  ;  in  the  contrast  between  the  attitude 
towards  Egypt  and  Assyria  here  and  in  the  rest  of  Isaiah  and  pre-exilic 
prophecy  generally ;  and  in  the  apparent  references  to  Jewish  colonies  in 
Egypt  and  to  the  temple  of  Onias.  This  temple  was  erected  in  the  nome 
of  Heliopolis  (City  of  the  Sun),  and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  a  Temple  of 

^  Cheyne  and  Duhm  regard  the  section  as  post-exilic. 
2  Prophets,  1895,  pp.  336,  436. 

'  tf.^.,  by  Driver,  204,  Dillmann,  A.T.  Thfol.y  501,  Guthe 
(Kautzsch,  Bibel);  and,  ap.  Cheyne,  109,  Cornill,  Kuenen,  and 

bTADE. 


i8o  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

the  Sun,  c.  i6o.  Hence  Duhm  dates  this  passage  c.  150,  and  explains 
Assyria  of  the  Greek  kingdom  of  Syria,^  Cheyne  assigns  the  passage  to 
27s  (?),  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  and  many  others*  regard  the 
passage  as  post-exilic.  If  so,  the  superstitious  use  of  the  maggeba  had  long 
been  forgotten,  and  the  term  is  used  in  a  symbolic  sense. 

XX.,  In  the  year  711,  when  Sargon's  general  took  Ashdod, 
Isaiah  is  commanded  to  go  naked  and  barefoot  three  years  as 
a  sign  of  the  captivity  of  Egypt  and  Ethiopia. 

xxi.  i-io,  Lament  over  the  imminent  sack  of  Babylon  by 
the  Medes  and  Elamites. 

Sometimes  connected  with  the  captures  of  Babylon  by  the  Assyrians 
from  Merodach-Baladan  in  the  time  of  Isaiah,  but  the  section  presupposes 
the  situation  towards  the  close  of  the  Exile,  and  may  be  assigned  to  that 
period.^ 

xxi.  II,  12,  Two  obscure  verses  connected  with  Edom 
(Seir),  possibly  a  sequel  to  the  preceding;  Edom,  which 
prospered  under  the  Chaldaeans,  being  anxious  as  to  the 
consequences  of  the  Fall  of  Babylon. 

xxi.  13-17,  Ruin  of  the  Dedanites  and  Kedarenes  (Arabian 
tribes). 

Often  connected  with  one  or  other  of  the  Assyrian  invasions ;  Duhm 
connects  with  the  rest  of  the  chapter  ;  Cheyne  regards  16,  17  as  Isaiah's, 
711,  to  which  later  passages,  604-561,  have  been  prefixed. 

xxii.  1-14,  The  Valley  of  Vision,  Jerusalem  is  besieged  after 

the  defeat  of  the  army,  Jehovah  calls  to  penitence,  but  men 

sought  to  drown  care  in  debauchery :  "  Let  us  eat  and  drink, 

for  to-morrow  we  die."   Such  sin  must  be  punished  with  death. 

Probably  to  be  connected  with  Sennacherib's  siege  in  701,  and  not  with 
Sargon's  campaign  in  711.  It  may  have  been  purely  predictive  at  the 
outset  of  the  revolt  against  Sennacherib,  or  may  have  been  uttered  during 
the  war,  before  Hezekiah  had  accepted  Isaiah's  teaching,  or  may  be  a 
retrospect,  a  judgment  after  the  danger  was  over  on  the  conduct  and 
temper  of  the  people  during  the  war. 

xxii.  15-25,  Shebna,  the  steward,  probably  a  partisan  of 
the  Egyptian  party,  is  to  be  replaced  by  Eliakim,  whose 
subsequent  fall  is  also  predicted. 

Connected  with  the  crisis  in  701 ;  24  f.,  and  perhaps  19-23  may  be  later 
than  15-18. 

1  So  substantially  Hitzig,  followed  by  Geiger  and  Merx  (Cheyne, 
Introd.y  p.   109  n.). 

*  e.g.,  Gratz  (ap.  Cheyne,  I.e.),  Kayser-Marti,  115,  Kellner, 
*•  Un-isaianic,"  Mitchell,  Skinner  "probably,"  Smend,  A,T.  Theol.^ 
210.    Cf.  section  2  (a).  «  Driver,  205. 


ISAIAH    I.-XXXV.  i8i 

xxiii.,  Tyre  is  to  be  overthrown,  but  restored  after  seventy 

years,  to  trade  for  the  benefit  of  Jehovah  and  his  people. 

Verses  1-14  may  be  connected  with  the  siege  of  Tyre  by  Shalmaneser 
IV.,  727-722,  or  with  Sennacherib's  campaign  in  Phoenicia,  701.  Verse  13, 
if  read  as  in  R.V.,  might  refer  to  one  of  the  captures  of  Babylon  by  the 
Assyrians,  710  and  703,  but  the  text  is  probably  corrupt.  Cheyne  regards 
it  as  a  late  section  on  an  Isaianic  basis,  and  Duhm  connects  it  with  the  de- 
vastation of  Phoenicia  by  Artaxerxes  III.,  c.  349,  the  subject  being  origin- 
ally Sidon,  for  which  Tyre  was  substituted  by  an  editor.  Verses  15-18  are 
probably  post-exilic. 

XXIV. -XXVII.,  Second  Group  of  Sections,  not  by 
Isaiah,  Anonymous;  Post-Exilic  Apocalypse  concerning 
THE  Last  Things. 

xxiv..  Earth  and  heaven  are  involved  in  one  common  shock 
of  doom,  the  City  of  Confusion  is  singled  out  for  special 
judgment,  the  praises  of  the  righteous  are  heard  from  the 
ends  of  the  earth. 

XXV.  i-xxvi.  6,  The  thanksgiving  of  Israel  for  the  overthrow 
of  the  City  of  Confusion  and  of  Moab,  and  for  the  conse- 
quent salvation  of  God's  people. 

xxvi.  7-19,  Prayer  of  God's  people  for  protection  and 
deliverance  in  evil  times. 

xxvi.  20-xxvii.  13,  Out  of  the  present  trouble,  and  out  of 

the  distress  which  has  befallen  Israel  on  account  of  its  sins, 

shall  issue  the  ruin  of  Israel's  oppressors  and  the  restoration 

of  God's  people. 

It  is  generally  recognised^  that,  with  the  possible  exception  of  Isaianic 
fragments  borrowed  by  the  author,  these  chapters  are  not  the  work  of 
Isaiah.  Here,  as  in  Micah  iv.-vii.,  compared  with  Micah  i.-iii.,  the  im- 
pression made  is  quite  different  from  that  produced  by  the  admitted 
writings  of  the  prophet.  Isaiah's  utterances  reflect  at  every  turn  the 
actual  circumstances  of  his  time;  here  we  are  in  a  different  world  from 
that  of  Palestine  in  the  eighth  century  B.C.  Isaiah  was  concerned  with 
Judah  and  Israel,  and  their  neighbours  and  enemies ;  here  we  have  a 
judgment  embracing  earth  and  heaven.  Assyria  was  not  a  city  state, 
and  certainly  Isaiah  never  speaks  of  it  as  such  ;  here  the  oppressor  is 
a  great  city,  possibly  Babylon.  ^    In  spite  of  a  number  of  resemblances, 

^  The  chief  exception  is  an  able  monograph  by  W.  E.  Barnes,  '  *  An 
examination  of  the  objections  brought  against  the  genuineness  of  Isaiah 
xxiv.-xxvii.,"  Cambridge,  189 1.  Cf.  Driver,  207,  Cheyne,  Introd., 
147  ff. 

'^  xxv.  2,  xxvi.  5,  perhaps  also  xxiv.  10,  the  City  of  Confusion  here  is 
sometimes  understood  of  Jerusalem,  Skinner. 


\S2  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

due  to  literary  use  of  the  actual  writings  of  Isaiah,  the  general  style 
is  different  from  that  of  Isaiah. 

It  is  probable  that  a  poem  consisting  of  xxiv. ,  xxv.  6-8,  xxvi.  20-xxvii. 
I,  xxvii.  12,  13,  has  been  expanded  by  the  insertion  of  the  songs  of  thanks- 
giving, xxv.  1-5,  9-12,  xxvi.  1-6,  xxvii.  2-6 ;  of  the  prayer  and  medita- 
tion, xxvi.  7-19  ;  and  of  the  obscure  passage  xxvii.  7-11.^ 

These  chapters  presuppose  the  imminence  of  far-reaching  political 
changes  which  might  be  expected  to  bring  deliverance  to  Israel,  possibly 
through  much  loss  and  suffering ;  and  ruin  to  its  enemies.  Such  a  situa- 
tion existed,  in  a  measure,  towards  the  close  of  the  Exile ;  or,  more 
exactly,  in  the  time  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah  ^ ;  or,  probably  during  the 
earlier  stages  of  Alexander's  attack  on  the  Persian  empire.  This  section 
has  been  referred  to  each  of  these  periods.  The  Exile'  is  suggested  by  the 
identification  of  the  "city"  with  Babylon.  But  the  vague,  yet  detailed 
apocalyptic  picture  points  to  a  later  date ;  Babylon  was  not  destroyed  by 
Cyrus,  and  the  Jews  still  looked  forward  to  its  ruin  in  the  time  of 
Zechariah.*  If  the  "city"  is  not  Babylon,  but  either  Jerusalem  or  a 
symbolic  city  suggested  by  Babylon,  we  might  follow  Cheyne  in  assigning 
this  section  to  the  eve  of  Alexander's  conquest  of  Persia.  Duhm  connects 
it  with  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  Antiochus  Sidetes,  soon  after  the 
accession  of  John  Hyrcanus,  129.  The  "city"  is  Samaria,  destroyed  by 
John  Hyrcanus. 

The  apocalypse  is  remarkable  as  containing  some  of  the  most  striking 
of  the  O.T.  passages  suggesting  a  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  an  eternal 
life.  In  xxv.  8,'  "  He  hath  swallowed  up  death  for  ever,"  implies  that  in 
the  Messianic  era,  Israelites  will  never  die,  while  xxvi.  19  points  to  a 
resurrection  of  dead  Israelites.  Universalism  finds  striking  expression  in 
the  statement '  that  Jehovah  Sabaoth  will  prepare  a  feast  for  all  nations  in 
Zion,  and  there  destroy  the  veil  that  is  spread  over  them. 

XXVIII.-XXXII.,  Third  Group  of  Isaiah's  Prophecies. 

xxviii.,  xxix.,  The  Fall  of  Ephraim  a  warning  to  the 
priests,  prophets,  and  rulers  of  Jerusalem  of  the  disasters  by 
which  their  sin  will  be  punished.  (The  dependence  of  the 
former  on  inspiration.'^)  Ariel,  />.,  Jerusalem,  is  besieged,  but 
her  foes  vanish  like  chaff.  The  prophets  are  useless,  the 
people  only  offer  lip-service,  and  are  slaves  to  tradition. 
Lack  of  faith  will  be  put  to  shame  by  the  glories  of  the 
Messianic  era.^ 

These  chapters  are  compilations  ;  they  are  parallel  to  the  other  pro- 
phecies, to  which  they  might  almost  serve  as  a  summary.  As  a  whole, 
they  connect  with  the  period  when  Judah  was  planning  to  revolt  against 

^  So  Cheyne  and  Duhm,  c/.  Skinner,  IsaiaA^  p.  203. 

2  Hag.  ii.  6-9,  20-23,  Zech.  i.  11-17.  ^  So  Kellner. 

*  Zech.  V.  5-1 1.     The  section  is  referred  to  this  period  by  Dillmann. 

*  Quoted  in  i.  Cor.  xv.  54,  and  Rev.  vii.  17.  ^  xxv.  6,  7. 

7  xxviii.  23-29,  if  not  a  later  addition,  may  imply  that  a  fortiori  states- 
men need  inspired  guidance.  *  xxix.  15-34. 


ISAIAH    I.-XXXV.  183 

Sennacherib,  relying  on  help  from  Egypt,  i.e.y  c.  702.  xxviii.  1-6  may 
have  been  composed  just  before  the  Fall  of  Samaria,  and  afterwards 
utilised  as  an  introduction.  On  the  other  hand,  xxviii.  1-6,  has  been  held 
to  determine  the  date  of  the  whole  series  of  prophecies,  which  have  been 
therefore  assigned  to  c.  722.  The  Messianic  picture  xxix.  16-24  is  often 
regarded  as  post- exilic* 

XXX.,  xxxi.,  A  collection  of  prophecies  on  the  folly  and  sin 
of  alliance  with  Egypt,  with  which  have  been  combined  an 
apocalyptic  picture  of  the  regeneration  of  Israel  and  the  re- 
newal of  Nature  in  the  Messianic  era,  ^  and  two  sections  ^  on 
the  deliverance  of  Israel  from  Assyria. 

The  interest  in  the  Egyptian  alliance  connects  with  the  eve  of  Senna- 
cherib's invasion,  702.  Duhm  and  Mitchell  regard  xxx.  18-26,  and 
Cheyne  and  Kellner  18-33  as  post-exilic.  Cheyne  also  rejects  xxxi. 
5-9. 

xxxii.,  A  picture  of  the  Righteous  King,  the  spiritual  re- 
generation and  material  prosperity  of  the  Messianic  age,  into 
which  is  inserted  a  warning  to  the  ladies  of  Jerusalem.^ 

Driver  regards  this  chapter  as  a  sequel  to  the  preceding,  «.«.,  c.  702  ; 
Duhm  regards  it  as  mostly  Isaiah's,  and  partly,  at  any  rate,  the  work  of  his 
old  age.     Cheyne  and  Cornill  treat  it  as  post-exilic. 

XXXIII.-XXXV.,  Third  Group  of  Sections  not  by 
Isaiah. 

xxxiii.,  An  Apocalyptic  Psalm,  in  which  the  Jews,  in  their 
distress,  look  forward  to  deliverance  and  the  establishment 
of  a  Messianic  King,  who  shall  reign  in  peace  at  Jerusalem. 

The  style,  the  apocalyptic  character,  the  description  of  Zion  as  righteous, 
and  as  the  "city  of  sacred  feast"  or  ** feasts,"*  the  parallels  with  late 
psalms,  all  point  to  a  post-exilic  date.'  Driver,  however,  stilF  refers  it  to 
the  point  in  Sennacherib's  invasion,  at  which,  having  accepted  tribute 
from  Hezekiah,  he  made  fresh  demands  on  him,  thus  breaking  a  covenant." 

xxxiv.,  The  Doom  of  Edom,  when  Jehovah  chastises  the 
nations. 

The  singling  out  of  Edom  as  a  special  object  of  divine  justice  began 
with  the  hostility  of  Edom  to  the  Jews  at  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem.  Hence 
this  section  is  exilic  or  post-exilic* 

*  Cheyne,  Duhm  (Maccaboean),  Mitchell.  Cheyne  also  rejects 
xxviii,  5,  6,  23-29,  xxix.  5,  7,  8,  ii,  12.  '  xxx.  18-26. 

'  xxx.  27-33,  xxxi.  5-9.  *  9-14.  ^  Verses  5,  20. 

'  Cheyne,  Duhm,  c.  162,  Cornill,  Kayser-Marti,  p.  115. 
^  213,  cf.  ii.  Kings  xviii.  13-27.  ®  Verse  8. 

•  Driver  towards  close  of  Exile  on  account  of  parallels  with  Isaiah 
xl.  ff.,  etc.;  so  Cornill,  Cheyne,  400  or  later. 


i84  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

XXXV.,  The  wilderness  is  turned  into  a  fruitful,  well-watered 
garden,  through  which,  by  a  holy  way,  the  exiles  return  to 
Zion. 

Probably  sequel  to  xxxiv.  by  same  author.  The  parallels  with  Isaiah 
xl.  ff.  may  point  to  a  similar  date  or  to  dependence  on  exilic  literature. 

(d)  Usi  in  N.T, — The  commission  to  harden  the  people's 

hearts,   vi.  g   f.,   was  a  favourite   quotation   of  our   Lord's, 

Matt.  xiii.   14  f.,  Mark  iv.   12,  Luke  viii.   10,  John  xii.  40, 

Acts  xxviii.  26  f.     The  LXX.  of  vii.  14  is  quoted  in  Matt. 

i.  23,  Luke  i.  31,  "A  virgin  shall  conceive,"  etc. ;  also  i.  9  in 

Rom.  ix.  29;  viii.   12  f.  in  i.  Peter  iii.   14  f. ;  viii.   17  f.  in 

Heb.  ii.   13  f. ;  ix.   1  f.  in  Matt.  iv.  15  f.;  x.  22  f.  in  Rom. 

ix.  27  f.;  xxii.   13  in  i.  Cor.  xv.  32;   xxviii.   11   in  i.  Cor. 

xiv.  21 ;  xxviii.  16  in  Rom.  ix.  33,  x.  11,  i.  Peter  ii.  6;  xxix.  10 

in  Rom.  xi.  8;  xxix.   13  in  Matt.  xv.  8  f.,  Mark  vii.  6  f. ; 

xxix.  14  in  i.  Cor.  i.  19. 

3.  Isaiah  xxxvi.-xxxix. 

The  Historical  Appendix  to  the  Collection^  i.-xxxv. — An 
account  of  Sennacherib's  invasion,  Hezekiah's  sickness  and 
recovery,  and  Merodach-baladan's  embassy.  It  is  chiefly  taken 
from  ii.  Kings  xviii.  13-xx.  19,  q.v.  The  main  differences  are 
the  omission  of  ii.  Kings  xviii.  14-16  (Hezekiah's  submission) 
and  the  insertion  of  Hezekiah's  prayer  (xxxviii.  9-20). 

The  dependence  on  Kings  is  shown  by  the  following  facts : 
the  collection  to  which  the  appendix  is  added  contains  sections 
much  later  than  the  final  compilation  of  the  Book  of  Kings ; 
the  peculiarities  of  the  appendix  are  best  explained  by 
supposing  it  a  secondary  work  based  on  Kings,  which  it 
partly  abridges,  partly  distorts,^  and  partly  follows  in  the 
form  and  with  the  additions  due  to  the  Deuteronomic  editor 
of  Kings. 

Hezekiah's  prayer  is  the  psalm  of  a  sufferer  who  has 
recovered  from  dangerous  illness.     The  heading,  where  we 

^  e.g.^  xxxviii.  21,  22  =  ii.  Kings  xx.  7,  8  is  unintelligible  as  it  stands  in 
Isaiah,  and  has  been  misplaced  through  the  insertion  of  Hezekiah's  prayer. 
The  two  "had  saids"  of  E.V.  are  harmonising  mistranslations.  The 
verbs  are  the  same  as  in  Kings. 


INTRODUCTION   TO   XL.-LXVI.         185 

should  read  "Miktam  of  Hezekiah,"  and  the  reference  to 
stringed  instruments,^  show  that  the  poem  has  been  taken 
from  a  collection  of  psalms,  to  the  editor  of  which  the 
ascription  to  Hezekiah  is  probably  due.  The  language  and 
ideas  are  similar  to  those  of  Job  and  late  psalms,  and  the 
poem  is  probably  post-exilic.^  Dillmann,  however,  defended 
the  authorship  by  Hezekiah. 

4.  Introduction  to  xl.-lxvi. 

(a)  Composition  of  xl.-lxvi. — A  variety  of  evidence  shows  that 
these  chapters  are  not  the  work  of  Isaiah,  and  do  not  belong 
to  his  age,  and  that,  with  small  and  doubtful  exceptions, 
no  part  of  them  is  earlier  than  the  close  of  the  Exile. 
The  Historical  Appendix  would  be  intended  to  close  the 
collection  of  Isaiah's  prophecies,  as  a  similar  appendix  does 
that  of  Jeremiah.  Hence  the  editor  who  added  it  did  not 
know  xl.  ff.  as  Isaiah's.  These  chapters  are  anonymous, 
they  have  no  heading  ascribing  them  to  Isaiah.  Ezra  i.  i  f.^ 
refer  to  Isaiah  xliv.  28,  but  state  that  Cyrus  acted  according 
to  a  prophecy  of  Jeremiah,  and  do  not  mention  Isaiah. 
So  that  the  author  of  Ezra  knew  Isaiah  xliv.,  but  not  as 
Isaiah's.  Moreover  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  in  dealmg  with 
the  Exile  and  Restoration  do  not  mention  any  prophecies 
of  Isaiah  on  the  same  subject. 

The  historical  situation  presupposed  in  many  sections,  is 
clearly  that  of  the  Exile,  and  in  others  apparently  still  later.'* 
On  the  other  hand,  there  is  nothing  to  suggest  that  the 
author  is  living  in  Isaiah's  time.  Isaiah  constantly  betrays 
his  interest  in  the  people  and  circumstances  of  his  own 
time,  in  Hezekiah,  Pekah,  and  Rezin,  in  Judah,  Ephraim, 
Syria,  Assyria,  and  Egypt.  In  xl.  ff.  all  these  have  dis- 
appeared, Assyria  and  Egypt  are  only  referred  to  as  matter 
of  ancient  history.  It  is  not  that  the  chapters  predict  the 
ruin  of  Jerusalem  and  the  Exile  and  Return.  They  assume 
that  Jerusalem  is  in  ruins  and  the  Jews  in  Exile,  and  describe 

*  Verses  9,  20.        '  Cheyne,  Duhm,  Mitchell. 

'  300-250.  *  Cf.  on  xl.-xlviii.,  xlix.-lv.,  Iv.-lxvi. 


i86  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

the  Return  as  imminent.  They  would  have  been  unin- 
telligible to  Isaiah  and  his  contemporaries.  Professor  G.  A. 
Smith  writes  ^ :  **  It  will  perhaps  startle  some  to  hear  John 
Calvin  quoted  on  behalf  of  the  exilic  date  of  these  prophecies. 
But  let  us  read  and  consider  this  statement  of  his :  *  Some 
regard  must  be  had  to  the  time  when  this  prophecy  was 
uttered;  for  since  the  rank  of  the  kingdom  had  been  obliterated, 
and  the  name  of  the  royal  family  had  become  mean  and  con- 
temptible, during  the  captivity  in  Babylon,  it  might  seem  as  if 
through  the  ruin  of  that  family  the  truth  of  God  had  fallen 
into  decay,  and  therefore  he  bids  them  contemplate  by  faith 
the  throne  of  David,  which  had  been  cast  down.' "  ^ 

The  theology  of  xl.  ff.  is  different  and  more  advanced 
than  that  of  Isaiah.  Isaiah's  theology  is  subordinated  to 
his  practical  message,  but  xl.  ff.  dwell  on  the  transcendental 
attributes  of  God;  they  substitute  the  Servant  of  Jehovah 
for  the  Messianic  King,  and,  in  some  sections,  represent  the 
Jews  not,  as  in  Isaiah,  hopelessly  lost  in  sin,  but  as  charged 
with  a  spiritual  mission  to  the  Gentiles. 

The  evidence  of  style  and  language  is  also  strongly  against 
authorship  by  Isaiah,  and  in  favour  of  exilic  or  post-exilic 
dates  for  the  various  sections.  These  chapters  only  resemble 
the  actual  prophecies  of  Isaiah,  as  a  later  work  would 
necessarily  resemble  a  well-known  classic  of  earlier  times 
on  a  similar  subject.  They  are  influenced  in  the  same  way 
by  Jeremiah.  On  the  other  hand,  most  of  the  characteristic 
terms,  phrases,  and  idioms  used  by  Isaiah  are  either  absent 
from  or  very  rare  in  xl.  ff.,  and  vice  verscL  these  chapters 
introduce  a  new  vocabulary  and  style  ot  :heir  own.^ 

^  Isaiah^  vol.  ii.,  pp.  14  f.  '  Calvin  on  Isaiah  Iv.  3. 

^  Only  two  or  three  illustrations  can  be  given,  e.g.^  elilim,  "  nonentities," 
of  idols,  occurs  seven  times  in  i.-xxxi.,  and  nevor  in  xl.  ff.,  though  it 
would  have  been  most  useful  in  the  polemic  against  idols.  On  the  other 
hand,  'a/>A,  "also"  occurs  twenty-two  times  in  xl.-xlviii.,  never  in  un- 
disputed portions  of  Isaiah.  Of  course,  the  force  of  such  items  of  evidence 
is  cumulative,  and  can  only  be  appreciated  if  carefully  and  exhaustively 
studied.  See  Cheyne,  Introduction  to  Isaiah  ;  Driver,  Introduction, 
pp.  225  ff.,  Isaiah  (*•  Men  of  the  Bible");  and  Skinner,  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi., 
pp.  xxxix.  ff. 


INTRODUCTION   TO  XL.-LXVI.         187 

The  integrity  of  xl.  ff.  is  still  matter  of  controversy.  Driver 
stilP  states  that  "These  chapters  form  a  continuous  pro- 
phecy," and  apparently  maintains  unity  of  authorship,  but 
admits  that  "The  literary  unity  of  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  is  undoubtedly 
imperfect,  especially  in  its  later  chapters :  naturally  the  whole 
will  not  have  been  delivered  by  the  prophet  continuously." 
But  the  tendency  of  criticism  is  against  the  integrity,  which, 
even  apart  from  the  possible  insertion  of  earlier  material,  is 
often  denied.^  Cornill  ascribes  xl.-lxii.  to  the  same  author, 
xl.-xlviii.  before  the  Exile,  xlix.-lxii.  after.  He  regards  Ixiii.- 
Ixvi.  as,  at  any  rate,  in  their  present  form,  by  another  author. 
Duhm  regards  xl.-lv.,^  "Deutero-Isaiah,"  as  a  single  work  with 
which  the  Servant  poem,  an  independent  post-exilic  work, 
c.  500,  has  been  interwoven ;  lvi.-lxvi.,  "  Trito-Isaiah,"  is 
another  single  work,  c.  444.  Cheyne  regards  xl-xlviii.^  as 
exilic,  xlix.-lv.^  as  a  post-exilic  appendix  to  it,  the  independent 
Servant  poem  being  interwoven  with  the  complete  work ;  lvi.- 
lxvi.  is  a  collection  of  prophecies,  450-350.  The  clearest  way 
of  stating  the  facts  bearing  on  integrity  has  seemed  to  be  to 
deal  with  sections  separately.  At  present,  evidence  and  dis- 
cussion point  to  the  conclusion  that  xl.-lv.^  are  exilic,  the 
Servant  passages  an  independent  exilic  or  post-exilic  poem, 
and  lvi.-lxvi.,  in  spite  of  some  serious  difficulties,  a  collection 
of  post-exilic  passages  by  different  authors.  Such  reasons  for 
this  view  as  space  permits  will  be  found  in  connection  with  the 
separate  sections. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances  of  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi. — These 
chapters  in  their  different  sections  are  referred  to  various 
dates  between  Manasseh,  c,  695,  and  Alexander  the  Great, 
333,  but  chiefly  to  c.  549-432.  During  549-538  Jerusalem 
and  the  Temple  were  in  ruins,  and  the  bulk  of  the  people 
exiles  in  Babylonia.  After  the  overthrow  of  the  Babylonian 
empire  by  Cyrus,  which  was  clearly  threatened  after  549, 
Judaea  and  the  Jews  became  subjects  of  Persia;  there  was  a 

1  Sixth  Edition,  pp.  230,  244. 

8  G.  A.  Smith,  Isaiah^  xl.  ff.,  p.  20, 

•  Less  Servant  passages. 


i88  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Jewish  community  in  Judaea,^  which  rebuilt  the  Temple,  but 
had  to  maintain  a  constant  struggle  with  physical  disadvan- 
tages and  unfriendly  neighbours.  It  deemed  as  if  the  Jews 
would  be  absorbed  in  the  neighbouring  tribes,  and  the  worship 
of  Jehovah  be  degraded  to  the  level  of  and  combined  with 
that  of  "other  gods."  Nehemiah  and  Ezra  secured  the 
distinct  existence  of  the  community  and  its  religion,  by  build- 
ing the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  and  separating  the  Congregation 
of  Israel  from  the  Samaritans  and  their  Jewish  allies.  The 
Persian  government  was  usually  favourable  to  the  Jewish 
worship  of  Jehovah,  but  local  officials  were  sometimes  hostile, 
and  in  350-345,  under  Artaxerxes  Ochus,  the  Jews  were  dis- 
affected, and  the  Persians  oppressed  them — probably  also  at 
other  times.2 

5.  Isaiah  xl.-lv.     Duhm's  Deutero-Isaiah. 

(a)  Contents, 

xl.,  xli..  Promise  of  the  Return  of  the  Exiles,  guaranteed  by 
the  unique  deity  of  Jehovah,  which  is  manifested  in  Nature 
and  Providence,  and  especially  in  the  victorious  advance  of 
Cyrus,  because  Jehovah  raised  him  up  and  announced  his 
coming  beforehand. 

xlii.  1-9,  First  Servant  Passage. — The  meek  and  gentle 
Teacher  of  the  Law  as  the  Restorer  of  Israel. 

Duhm  and  Cheyne  regard  only  1-4  as  part  of  the  original  poem. 
According  to  Cheyne,  5-7  is  an  editorial  link  connecting  the  Song  on 
the  Servant  with  the  prophetic  framework. 

xlii.  lo-xlviii.,  Further  exposition  of  themes  of  xl.  f..  De- 
liverance for  Israel,  by  the  free  grace  of  Jehovah,  through 
His  Messiah,  Cyrus;  Judgment  on  Babylon,  Vindication  of 
Jehovah's  unique  deity  as  above,  Humiliation  of  the  gods  of 
Babylon. 

Later  insertions,  according  to  Duhm  and  Cheyne,  are  two  sections  on 
idolatry,  xliv.  9-20,  xlvi.  6-8,  and  the  series  of  passages  in  xlviii.,  which 
address  Israel  as  treacherous,  apostate,  and  unbelieving,  viz.,  i*',  2,  4,  S**, 
7^,  8^-10,  11^,  16^-19,  22.  The  harsh  and  unqualified  censure  of  these 
verses  is  very  different  from  the  sympathetic  and  encouraging  attitude  of 
the  rest  of  xl. -xlviii. 

^  Cf.  on  Ezra. 

'  Cf.  ** Historical  Circumstances'^  in  §§  on  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Haggai, 
Zechariabi  Malachi. 


ISAIAH   XL.-LV.  189 

xlix.  1-6  (7-13),  Second  Servant  Passage. — The  Prophet  not 
only  to  Israel,  but  also  to  the  nations.  (The  agent  at  first 
despised,  then  honoured^of  the  glorious  restoration  of  Israel.) 

Verses  7-13  are  sometimes  regarded  as  part  of  the  Servant  poem  ;  7-12 
form  one  of  Cheyne's  "  links." 

xlix.  14-I.  3,  Jehovah  dispels  doubt  and  depression  by 
assurances  of  His  power  and  set  purpose  to  deliver  Israel. 

1.  4-9  (10,  11),  Third  Servant  Fassage^  The  persecuted 
Prophet,  who  shall  be  vindicated  and  avenged.  (The  Servant's 
patience  an  example.) 

Verses  10,  11  another  "link,"  an  application  to  later  times,  Cheyne; 
similarly  Duhm  and  Skinner. 

li.  i-lii.  12,  Exultant  lyrics  on  the  imminent  restoration  of 
Jerusalem  from  its  ruin  and  the  departure  of  the  captives  from 
Babylon. 

Duhm  and  Cheyne  regard  li.  15,  16 ;  Hi.  3-6  as  insertions. 

Hi.  13-liii.  12,  Fourth  Servant  Passage^  The  despised 
Martyr  and  His  reward,  Atonement  for  Israel. 

liv.,  Iv.,  The  future  glories  of  Zion  contrasted  with  her  ruin 
and  humiliation,  Appeals  to  the  people  to  accept  the  certain 
deliverance. 

(b)  Date  and  Authorship  of  xl.-xlviii.  {apart  from  Servant 
Passages), — This  section  is  generally  assigned  to  the  close  of 
the  Exile.  Those  addressed  are  exiles  in  Babylonia,^  to  whom 
a  speedy  return  through  the  desert  to  Jerusalem  is  promised.^ 
Jehovah  has  raised  up  Cyrus,  already  a  mighty  conqueror, 
and  about  to  overthrow  Babylon,  release  the  exiles  and 
rebuild  Zion  and  its  Temple.^  The  situation  thus  pre- 
supposed points  to  a  date  between  the  conquest  of  Media 
by  Cyrus  in  549  and  his  capture  of  Babylon  in  538.  The 
author  probably  wrote  in  Babylonia.*  His  name  is  quite 
unknown  \  cf  ^  ^. 

^  xlii.  22,  xliii.  14. 

2  xl.  i-ii,  xliii.  1-7,  19,  xlviii.  20,  21. 

^  xli.  25,  xliv.  24-xlv.  3,  xlvi.  1-5,  10,  ir,  xlvii.,  xlviii.  14. 

*  Ewald  and  Bunsen  ascribed  xl.-lxvi.  to  a  Jew  writing  in  Egypt,  and 
others  to  a  Jew  in  Judsea,  Skinner,  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  ^  p.  1.  Duhm,  fesaia, 
p.  xviii.,  assigns  xl.-lv.  (apart  from  Servant  Passages)  to  a  Jew  in  Northern 
Phoenicia. 


190  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(c)  Teaching  of  xl.-xlviii.  {apart  from  Servant  Passages). — 
Confronted  with  the  magnificent  worship  of  the  Babylonian 
gods,  who,  it  might  be  supposed,  had  given  victory  to  their 
worshippers,  the  Jews  needed  to  be  reassured  as  to  the 
power  of  Jehovah.  Hence  a  formal  assertion  and  proof  of 
the  unique  deity  of  Jehovah  as  Creator  and  Governor  of 
the  world.^  This  proof  rests  partly  on  Jehovah's  announce- 
ment of  the  coming  conquests  of  Cyrus,  and  is  given  as  an 
assurance  of  the  deliverance  from  Babylon.  Cyrus  is  His 
Messiah,^  and  Israel  His  Servant.^  The  result  of  the  work 
of  Cyrus  will  be  the  recognition  of  Jehovah  as  the  one  true 
God  by  all  nations.* 

(d)  Use  in  N.  T.  of  xl.-xlviii. — xl.  3  f.  is  applied  to  John 
the  Baptist  in  Matthew  iii.  3,  Mark  i.  3,  John  i.  23,  Luke  iii.  3-6; 
and  xl.  8  is  quoted  in  i.  Peter  i.  24  f. ;  xl.  13  f.  in  Romans 
xi.  34  f.  and  i.  Corinthians  ii.  16;  and  xlv.  23  in  Romans  xiv.  11. 

(e)  Date  and  Authorships  etc.  of  xlix.-lv.  {apart  from 
Servant  Passages). — Prima  facie  these  sections  seem  to  imply 
the  same  historical  situation  as  xl.-xlviii.,  to  which  they  seem 
a  natural  sequel.  Judah  is  still  desolate,^  and  a  return  of  the 
exiles  ^  is  promised. 

CornilF  explains  the  acknowledged  break  at  the  end  of 
xlviii.  by  regarding  xlix.-lxii.  as  a  sequel  written  later  on  in 
Palestine  by  the  same  author;  while  Duhm  treats  xl.-lv.  as 
a  single  work.  Unless  the  Servant  passages  are  a  later 
insertion,  after  xlix.-lv.  had  been  added  to  xl.-xlviii.,  xl.-lv. 
is  obviously  a  single  work;  two  different  authors  would 
scarcely  have  utilised  the  Servant  poem  so  similarly  and  so 
harmoniously.  Differences  of  subject,  such  as  the  absence 
from  these  chapters  of  express  references  to  Cyrus,  Babylon, 
and  the  contrast  between  Jehovah  and  idols,  do  not 
necessarily  imply  a  distinct  work.     Nevertheless  Cheyne  in 

1  xl.,  xH.  21-29,  xliv.,  xlv.  1-3,  xlviii.  1-8. 

2  xlv.  I.  '  xlv.  4,  etc, 

<  xlv.  6,  14-17.  °  xlix.  19,  li.  3,  li.  17-lii.  2. 

^  xlix.  22-26,  li.  II  (gloss  according  to  Cheyne),  Hi.  II  f.  (understood 
of  Babylon),  Iv.  12.  ''  Page  157  f. 


ISAIAH   XL.-LV.  191 

the  Polychrome  Isaiah  follows  Kosters  in  adopting  a  view 
similar  to  that  of  Kuenen's,  which  he  expressly  rejected  in 
his  Introduction}  and  regards  xlix.-lv.  as  post-exilic,  and 
apparently  the  Servant  passages  as  later  insertions  still.  If 
such  a  view  is  adopted,  the  desolation  of  Zion  is  the  mean 
estate  of  Judah  after  the  Return,  and  the  exiles  are  those 
who  still  remained  in  Babylon.  Certainly  Zion  is  addressed 
rather  as  a  city  in  distress,  but  still  actually  existing,  than 
as  ruined  and  uninhabited.  Cheyne  excludes  authorship 
by  the  author  of  xl.-xlviii.  by  suggesting,  doubtfully,  the 
date  432. 

The  teaching  of  these  sections  is  substantially  included  in 
that  of  xl.-xlviii.,  the  tendency  is,  however,  to  dwell  on  the 
secular  dominion  rather  than  the  spiritual  influence  of  Israel, 
and  liv.  1 7  speaks  of  the  "  servants  "  instead  of  the  "  Servant 
of  Jehovah." 

In  N.T.  Hi.  5  is  quoted  in  Romans  ii.  24;  Hi.  7  in  Romans 
X.  1 5 ;  Hi.  1 1  in  ii.  Corinthians  vi.  17;  the  promise  made  to 
the  restored  Jerusalem  in  liv.  i  is  applied  to  the  heavenly 
Jerusalem  in  Galatians  iv.  27 ;  liv.  13  is  quoted  in  John  vi.  45 ; 
Iv.  3  in  Acts  xiii.  34. 

(f)  The  Servant  of  Jehovah^  xlii.  1-4  (5-9),  xlix,  1-6  (7-13), 
/.  4-9  (10,  11),  Hi,  i-^-Iiii.  12.2 

A  certain  connection  can  be  shown  between  these  sections 
and  their  contexts,  as  may  be  gathered  from  the  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  whether  the  verses  in  brackets  belong  to  the 
Servant  passages,  or  to  the  main  portion  of  xl.-lv.,  or  are 
editorial  Hnks  composed  to  connect  the  Servant  passages  with 
the  context.  Yet  these  passages  stand  out  from  the  surround- 
ing material;  the  connection  would  be  improved,  and  the 
whole  would  be  more  homogeneous  if  they  were  removed. 
Elsewhere  the  Servant  is  clearly  a  title  for  the  actual  Israel, 
there  is  scarcely  an  approach  to  personification;  here  the 
Servant  is  either  an  ideal  person,  or,  even  if  still  Israel,  Israel 
personified  as  a  teacher  and  prophet  of  Revelation,  and  a 

*  1895.        *  The  verses  in  brackets  are  perhaps  secondary ;  cf.  (a). 


192  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

martyr  (?  for  the  world).  The  ministry  to  all  nations,  and  the 
vicarious  atonement  of  the  sufferings  of  the  righteous  ^  are 
characteristic  of  these  sections. 

The  contrast  has  been  explained  as  follows :  (i.)  The  author 
used  an  earlier  poem,  possibly  composed  by  himself;  (ii.)  the 
sections  were  written  in  the  ordinary  way  as  part  of 
xlviii.-lv.,  and  the  contrast  is  a  literary  device  of  the  author  to 
produce  a  dramatic  effect ;  (iii.)  the  sections  are  parts  of  a 
separate  poem,  which  were  combined  by  an  editor  with  the 
rest  of  xlviii.-lv. 

The  Servant  in  these  passages  has  been  explained  as  Israel 
personified,  either  actual,  purified,  or  ideal,  or  the  righteous 
kernel  of  the  people,  or  the  genius  of  the  nation ;  as  describ- 
ing or  based  upon  the  experiences  of  Jeremiah,  of  some  post- 
exilic  scribe,  or  some  other  martyr;  as  personifying  the 
prophetic  order;  or  as  a  prediction  of  a  future  Prophet  or 
Redeemer.  In  any  case,  the  prophecy  received  its  only 
adequate  fulfilment  in  Christ ;  as  Prof.  G.  A.  Smith  writes  : 
"We  .  .  .  assert  what  none  but  prejudiced  Jews  have  ever 
denied,  that  this  great  prophecy  .  .  .  was  fulfilled  in  One 
Person,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  and  achieved  in  all  its  details  by 
Him  alone."^ 

If  these  sections  are  from  an  independent  poem,  the  Servant 
would  seem  to  be  a  person;  the  picture  can  scarcely  be  a 
mere  description  of  past  history,  though  some  features  may  be 
borrowed  from  the  experiences  of  a  prophet,  possibly  Jeremiah 
or  even  the  author  himself.  But  if  the  sections  were  written 
at  the  same  time  and  by  the  same  author  as  their  context,  the 
Servant  will  rather  be  Israel,  in  some  sense,  as  elsewhere  in 
xl.-lv. 

In  N.T.,  the  Servant  is  constantly  identified  with  Christ; 
cf.  xlii.  1-4  with  Matt.  xii.  17-21  ;  xlix.  6  with  Acts  xiii.  47  3; 
Iii.  15  with  Rom.  xv.  21 ;  liiL  i  with  John  xii.  38,  Rom.  x.  16; 

*  xlii.  I,  4,  xlix.  9,  liii.  5-12.  ^  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.,  p.  267. 

'  At  first  sight  Paul  and  Barnabas  seem  to  identify  themselves  with  the 
Servant ;  but  really  the  quotation  is  used  generally  to  justify  the  offer  of 
Christ's  Gospel  to  the  Gentiles. 


ISAIAH   LVI.-LXVI.  193 

liii.  4  with  Matt.  viii.  1 7,  i.  Peter  ii.  24  ff. ;  liii.  7  f.  with  Acts 
viii.  32  f.;  liii.  12  with  Luke  xxii.  37,  Heb.  ix.  28.^  Cf,  also 
xlix.  8  with  ii.  Cor.  vi.  2. 

6.  Isaiah  lvi.-lxvi     (Duhm's  Trito-Isaiah.) 
Ivi.   1-8,  Proselytes  and  Eunuchs  to  be  admitted  to  the 
privileges  of  Jehovah's  people,  on  condition  that  they  observe 
the  Sabbath ;  "for  my  house  shall  be  called  a  house  of  prayer 
for  all  peoples." 2     More  exiles  shall  yet  return. 

The  existence  of  the  Temple  and  the  implied  return  of  some  exiles 
point  to  a  post-exilic  date.  The  keen  interest  in  the  Sabbath  has  no 
parallel  in  xl.-lv.,  but  may  connect  with  Nehemiah's  enforcing  of  the 
observance  of  the  Sabbath.  ^    If  so,  we  may  date  c.  444.'' 

Ivi.  9-lvii.,  Denunciation  of  the  Jewish  rulers,  and  of  the 
immoral  superstitions  of  their  neighbours,  promise  of  ultimate 
forgiveness  and  deliverance  to  the  humble  and  penitent. 

The  references  to  rulers  and  worship  at  high  places  point  to  composition 
in  Palestine.  The  parallels  in  the  earlier  prophets  to  these  pictures  of 
government  and  religion  have  often  led  to  the  conclusion  that  Ivi.  9-lvii. 
II  or  13  is  borrowed  from  a  pre-exilic  prophet.^  Cheyne,  however, 
points  out  that  the  picture  suits  equally  well  the  low  material  and  spiritual 
state  of  the  Jews  before  the  reforms  of  Nehemiah,®  and  his  examination  of 
the  language  and  the  literary  parallels  leads  him  to  assign  Ivi.  9-lvii.  13a 
to  that  period,  the  idolaters  being  the  Samaritans.'^  He  regards  I3b-2i 
as  a  later  work  by  a  different  author. 

Iviii.,  The  True  Fast  and  the  True  Sabbath. 

The  marks  of  time  in  this  chapter  are  not  decisive,  but  its  position  in 
the  book,  and  the  parallels  to  Ivi,  1-8  and  Zechariah  vii.  1-14  point  to  a 
post-exilic  date. 

lix.  i-i5a,  Denunciation  of  the  Jews,  followed  by  their  un- 
reserved confession  of  sin. 

Here  again  lix.  3-15  is  often  regarded  as  pre-exilic  8;  the  section 
implies  at  least  autonomy  in  Judah,  and  cannot  well  be  exilic.  The  social 
wrong-doing  is  similar  to  that  denounced  by  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah.  But  the 
best  parallel  is  to  Nehemiah's  confession  on  behalf  of  Israel,  and  to  the 
confession  of  the  congregation  under  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,^  and  points  to  a 
date  in  that  period.  ^'^ 

*  Mark  xv.  28  is  a  misreading. 

2  Quoted  Matt.  xxi.  13,  Mark  xi.  1 7,  Luke  xix.  46. 

3  Neh.  x.  31,  xiii.  15-22.  *  So  Cheyne. 

^  Ryssel  (Kautzsch),  Cornill,  p.  160,  Driver,  p.  244,  "It  is 
generally  allowed  .  .  .  that  they  were  written  originally  in  the  age  of 
Jeremiah."  ♦^  So  also  Skinner.  '  So  Duhm. 

8  Driver,  p.  244,  "generally  allowed." 

»  Ezra  X.  2,  13 ;  Neh.  i.,  ix.  2,  33. 

*<!  Cheyne,  Duhm  ;  Skinner,  post-exilic,  3-8,  are  perhaps  an  addition. 


194  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

lix.  i5b-2ij  Jehovah  puts  on  the  Armour  of  Righteousness 
to  deliver  Israel.  In  verse  21,  His  Spirit  and  Revelation  shall 
always  abide  in  Israel. 

Parallel  to  Ixiii.  1-6  ;  Cheyne,  c.  432,  verse  21  an  addition.  Verses  7  f. 
are  quoted  Romans  iii.  15  ff^ 

Ix.-lxii.,  The  wealth  and  power,  the  splendour  and  glory  of 
Zion,  when  Jehovah  raises  her  from  her  low  estate. 

This  section  is  like  xl.-xlviii.  in  style  and  spirit,  but  resembles  xlix.-lv. 
still  more  closely.  It  might  possibly  be  a  detached  portion  of  either 
poem.  But,  though  the  situation  described  may  be  explained  as  that 
of  the  Exile,  it  is  more  natural  to  understand  that  Zion  and  the  Temple 
are  actually  in  existence.^  The  desolation  refers  to  the  poverty-stricken 
state  of  the  meagre  population  before  the  coming  of  Nehemiah.  More- 
over, the  tendency  to  revel  in  pictures  of  material  wealth  and  power 
has  developed  beyond  that  of  xlix.-lv.  Hence  Cheyne  regards  Ix.-lxii.  as 
composed  under  the  influence  of  xlix.-lv.;  Ixi.  1-4  and  Ixii.  i  being  imita- 
tions of  the  Servant  passages,  and  Ixi.  10  a  separate  prophecy  to  be  placed 
at  the  end  as  "Zion's  Response." 

In  N.T.  Ixi.  I  f ,  "The  spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me,"  etc.,  is  applied 
to  Christ  in  Luke  iv.  18  f. 

Ixiii.  1-6,  Vengeance  on  Edom. 

Parallel  to  lix.  1 5  ff. ,  and  xxxiv. ;  probably  connects  with  some  catastrophe 
which  befell  Edom  after  the  Exile.' 

Ixiii.  7-lxiv.,  Israel,  in  deep  distress,  and  acknowledging  its 
sin,  recalls  Jehovah's  former  goodness,  and  appeals  to  Him  to 
renew  His  mercy.  He  is  their  Father,  their  Redeemer,  before 
Him  they  are  as  clay  in  the  hands  of  the  potter.  It  is  He 
who  has  caused  them  to  err,  and  hardened  their  hearts.  None 
have  called  on  His  name,  because  He  hid  His  face  from  them, 
and  delivered  them  into  the  power  of  their  guilt.^  City  and 
Temple  are  in  ruins,  will  He  not  relent  ? 

The  statement*  that  the  holy  cities  and  Zion  are  a  desolation,  that 
the  Temple  has  been  burnt,  seems  to  show  that  these  chapters  are  exilic. 
The  situation  implied  is  similar  to  that  in  Lamentations,  only  there  is 
no  mention  of  a  captivity,  and  the  tone  is  less  submissive.  It  might  have 
been  written  in  Judah  towards  the  close  of  the  Captivity.  But  Ixiii.  18 
states  that  God's  people  had  only  possessed  the  land,  or,  it  may  be,  Zion, 
a  little  while,  which  would  not  apply  to  586.  We  know  of  no  later 
occasion  within  the  possible  dates,  when  the  Temple  was  burnt ;  but 
our  information  is  so  scanty  that  such  a  catastrophe  might  have  happened, 
and  left  no  clear  trace  in  history.  Cheyne  mentions  as  suggested  occasions 
of  these  disasters,  the  persecutions  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  and  the  period 
of  distress  before  the  coming  of  Nehemiah,  but  maintains  that  this  burning 
must  have  taken  place  under  Artaxerxes  Ochus,  c.  350.     Duhm  explains 

1  Ixii.  9,  la         "  Cheyne,  432  ?.         ^  i^iii.  16  f.         *  Ixiv.  10. 


ISAIAH   LVI.-LXVI.  195 

the  desolation  of  city  and  temple  as  the  Abiding  result  of  the  sack  in  586, 
the  new  city  and  temple  being  ignored  as  beneath  notice.  Even  if  exilic, 
the  section  is  so  different  in  spirit  from  xl.-lv.,  that  they  can  scarcely  be  by 
the  same  author.     In  N.T.  Ixiv.  4  is  quoted  in  i.  Corinthians  ii.  9. 

Ixv.,  Jehovah  inaugurates  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth,  and 
a  new  dispensation  in  Jerusalem,  from  which  superstitious 
idolaters  (?  the  Samaritans)  shall  be  excluded,  while  His 
servants  shall  prosper. 

Often,  but  improbably,  held  to  be  the  answer  to  Ixiii.  7-lxiv.  The 
chapter  seems  to  belong  to  a  time  when  the  opposition  of  parties  within  the 
community  passed  finally  into  formal  division  into  distinct  bodies.  It  may 
very  well  connect  with  the  final  severance  under  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  of  the 
congregation  from  the  Samaritans  and  their  adherents.^ 

In  N.T.  Ixv.  I  is  quoted  Romans  x.  20  f. 

Ixvi.  1-5,^  Another  contrast  of  the  true  worship  with  super- 
stition, introduced  by  the  declaration  that  Jehovah  needs  no 
earthly  Temple. ^ 

Either  a  warning  to  the  Jews  not  to  attach  too  much  importance  to  the 
restored  Temple  ;  or  a  protest  against  the  building  of  any  temple,  perhaps 
a  polemic  against  Haggai  and  Zechariah ;  or,  much  more  probably,  a  pro- 
test against  an  early  unrecorded  proposal  to  build  a  schismatic  Samaritan 
temple,  connecting,  as  3-5  shows,  with  the  same  crisis  as  Ixv.,  perhaps  at  a 
later  stage.* 

In  Acts  vii.  49  f.,  Ixvi.  i,  "  What  house  would  ye  build,"  etc.,  is  used 
by  Stephen,  defending  himself  against  a  charge  of  saying  that  Jesus  would 
destroy  the  temple,  to  show  that  the  Most  High  dwelleth  not  in  temples 
laid  with  hands.  His  indignant  audience  seem  to  have  at  once  cut  short  his 
speech. 

Ixvi.  6-24,  Jerusalem  exalted,  the  nations  chastised,  those 
still  in  exile  brought  home,  and  in  23  f.,  the  regular  observance 
of  new  moons  and  sabbaths  by  all  mankind,  the  carcases  of 
sinners  burning  publicly  for  ever. 

The  climax  of  Ixv. -Ixvi.  5  and  of  the  same  period;  21  f.  may  be 
an  addition.**  Verse  24,  the  germ  of  the  doctrine  of  Gehenna,  the  place 
of  the  lost,  is  referred  to  in  Mark  ix.  43  f.,  "If  thy  hand  offend  thee," 
etc. 

7.  Jeremiah. 

(a)  The  Prophet. — There  is  no  doubt  of  the  genuine  connec- 
tion of  the  bulk  of  the  book  with  Jeremiah.^    He  belonged 

^  Cheyne.  *  To  which  Che)me  adds  17,  i8a. 

'  Cf.  John  iv.  24. 

*  Cheyne,  432?;  Duhm;  Meyer,  Entstehung  des  Judentkums,  p.  89. 
^  Duhm,  Cheyne,  Skinner. 

^  For  critical  questions  see  (c)  Composition  and  (e)  Contents  under  the 
seveFal  sections. 


196  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

to  a  priestly  family  at  Anathoth,  three  miles  north  of  Jeru- 
salem, but  he  exercised  his  ministry  in  the  capital.  He 
remained  unmarried,  at  the  command  of  Jehovah.  In  the 
thirteenth  year  of  Josiah,  626,  while  still  young,  he  was  called 
to  be  a  prophet.  1  Hence  he  was  born  under  Manasseh,  and 
grew  up  under  the  reaction  against  Isaiah's  teaching.  Ap- 
parently this  reactionary  worship  had  established  its  claim  to 
represent  the  ancient  faith  of  Israel,  and  was  generally  upheld 
by  the  authorities  in  church  and  state,  for  Jeremiah  is  usually 
hostile  to  all  authorities,  princes,  prophets,  and  priests.  His 
earlier  ministry  and  that  of  Zephaniah  were  doubtless  among 
the  influences  which  led  to  the  reforms  of  Josiah  and  the^^ 
establishment  of  Deuteronomy.  From  621  to  608,  Jeremiah,'H|F 
most  exceptionally,  may  have  been  in  sympathy  with  the 
ruling  powers.  But  Josiah's  defeat  and  death  at  Megiddo 
must  have  seemed  the  divine  repudiation  of  Deuteronomy 
and  Jeremiah.  The  Egyptian  party,  also  that  of  religious 
reaction,  regained  its  supremacy  at  the  appointment  of 
Jehoiakim  by  Necho,  and,  with  brief  exceptions,  retained  it 
to  the  close  of  the  monarchy.  Throughout  this  period 
Jeremiah  defied  princes,  priests,  and  prophets  alike.  He  did 
his  best  to  baffle  the  pro-Egyptian  policy  of  the  government, 
to  purify  social  life  and  the  administration  of  justice,  and  to 
reform  religious  faith  and  worship,  but  with  little  •  external 
success.  As  his  hopes  of  winning  the  people  dwindled,  his 
threats  of  punishment  hardened  into  the  unqualified  predic- 
tion of  the  ruin  alike  of  Temple  and  city.  He  was  univers  J^  *- 
unpopular ;  the  people,  misapplying  Isaiah's  teaching,  clung  to 
the  Temple,  as  the  infallible  palladium  of  the  city.  When 
Jeremiah  foretold  its  ruin,  he  barely  escaped  with  his  life.  At 
another  time,  his  opponents  replied  to  his  threats  by  beating 
him  and  putting  him  in  the  stocks.  In  Jehoiakim  himself,  the 
prophet  found  an  able  and  determined  opponent,  but  Zedekiah 
was  a  helpless  tool  in  the  hands  of  the  stronger  party.  Jere- 
miah, on  the  one  hand,  and  the  princes  of  the  Egyptian  party 
with  their  hireling  priests  and  prophets,  on  the  other,  struggled 

*  i.,  xvi.  2. 


JEREMIAH  197 

fiercely  for  the  control  of  the  king.  His  conscience  inclined 
him  to  Jeremiah,  but  his  cowardice  decided  in  favour  of  the 
princes.  As  Judah  became  committed  to  the  hopeless  contest 
with  Nebuchadnezzar,  Jeremiah  proclaimed  the  success  of 
the  enemy,  urged  the  king  to  submit,  and  declared  that  safety 
could  only  be  found  in  deserting  to  the  besiegers.  He  was 
imprisoned  as  a  traitor,  and  was  only  saved  by  the  tardy 
interference  of  the  king  from  being  starved  to  death.  Re- 
leased by  the  Chaldeans,  after  the  sack  of  the  city,  he  threw 
in  his  lot  with  the  Jews  left  in  Judah,  but  was  carried  down  by 
them  to  Egypt.  When  we  last  read  of  him,  he  is  still  engaged 
in  his  life-long  task  of  rebuking  and  threatening  his  fellow- 
countrymen.  There  are  conflicting  traditions  as  to  his  death  ; 
Tertullian  ^  states  that  the  Jews  in  Egypt  stoned  him  to  death, 
which  seems  very  probable.  According  to  the  Jews  he 
escaped  to  Babylon  and  died  there.^ 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — Under  Manasseh,  Judah  was 
subject  to  Assyria.  But,  about  the  time  when  Jeremiah  began 
his  ministry,  628,  western  Asia  was  overrun  by  Scythian 
hordes.  These  served  the  prophet  in  his  early  utterances,  as 
the  original  of  the  invader  from  the  north,  who  should  be 
the  instrument  of  Jehovah's  chastisement  of  his  people. 
Assurbanipal,  the  last  great  Assyrian  king,  died  in  626.  From 
that  date  the  power  of  Assyria  dwindled  rapidly;  the  Syrian 
states  and  Israel  had  been  crushed ;  so  that  Judah  was  for  a 
time  the  strongest  power  in  Palestine,  and  Josiah  extended  his 
authority  over  part  of  Ephraim.  Meanwhile  Babylon  was 
aggrandising  itself  at  the  expense  of  Assyria,  but  its  claim  to 
supremacy  was  challenged  by  Pharaoh-Necho,  who  marched 
through  Palestine  on  his  way  to  the  Euphrates.  Josiah 
opposed  him,  and  was  defeated  and  slain  at  Megiddo,  609. 
Later  on  Necho  deposed  Jehoahaz,  and  made  Jehoiakim 
king.     Thus  for  a  time  Judah  was  entirely  controlled  by  the 

^  Adv,  Gnost.f  c.  8. 

*  The  ascription  to  Jeremiah  of  Deuteronomy,  Kings,  certain  Psahiis, 
etc.,  rests  on  no  good  evidence.  Jeremiah  has  often  been  held  to  be  the 
original  of  the  picture  of  the  suffering  Servant  of  Jehovah,  Isaiah  liiL 


198  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Egyptian  anti-prophetic  party.  It  was  probably  after  Nineveh 
had  been  captured,  and  the  Assyrian  empire  overthrown  by  the 
Medes  and  Babylonians,  c.  606,  that  Necho  was  defeated  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  at  Carchemish  in  605,  and  thenceforward 
western  Asia  lay  at  the  disposal  of  the  conqueror,  who  soon 
established  his  authority  in  Palestine.  Yet  the  tact  of 
Jehoiakim  enabled  him  to  retain  his  throne  and  persist  in  a 
pro-Egyptian  policy,  even  while  professing  loyalty  to  Babylon. 
He  died  just  in  time  to  escape  the  vengeance  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, but  his  son  and  successor,  Jehoiachin,  and  the  best 
of  the  population  were  carried  away  captive.  Although  his 
successor,  Zedekiah,  Jehoiakim's  brother,  was  the  nominee  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  he  either  could  not  or  would  not  control  the 
party  of  revolt  against  Babylon.  The  disloyalty  of  Judah  pro- 
voked a  fresh  Chaldean  invasion  and  siege  of  Jerusalem  ; 
Pharaoh  Hophra  advanced  to  its  relief,  but  retreated;  the 
siege,  which  had  been  raised  for  a  time,  was  resumed,  the 
city  taken  and  sacked,  the  king  with  his  court  and  most  of  the 
people  carried  away  captive.  The  attempt  to  form  a  new 
community  was  frustrated  by  the  murder  of  Gedaliah,  a 
Jewish  prince  acting  as  governor  for  the  Chaldeans;  and 
most  of  the  remaining  Jews  fled  to  Egypt.  There  is  evidence 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  invaded  Egypt,  c.  568,  at  the  beginning 
of  the  reign  of  Amasis. 

(c)  Composition, — In  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  Jeremiah 
dictated  to  Baruch  all  his  prophecies  against  Israel,  Judah, 
and  the  nations.  The  roll  on  which  Baruch  wrote  this  record 
was  burnt  by  the  king  next  year,  but  Jeremiah  dictated  its 
contents  afresh  to  Baruch,  who  wrote  them  on  a  second 
roll,  "and  there  were  added  besides  unto  them  many  like 
words."  ^  These  rolls  were  the  first  two  editions  of  our 
book,  which  no  doubt  includes  the  bulk  of  their  contents. 
We  have  thus  the  testimony  of  the  book  itself  that  the 
earliest  document  which  can  have  been  used  in  its  com- 
position was  written  from  the  prophet's  recollection  of  his 
utterances,  which  were  largely  supplemented  at  the  time  of 


JEREMIAH  199 

writing.  Utterances  of  an  earlier  date  are  thus  extant  in 
the  form  they  assumed  in  the  fifth  year  of  Jehoiakim.  The 
book  referred  to  in  xxx.  i  may  have  been  written  as  an 
appendix  to  Baruch's  roll,  possibly  also  by  Baruch.^  We 
can  only  determine  the  contents  of  Baruch's  roll  by  ascer- 
taining the  dates  of  the  several  prophecies,  which  cannot 
always  be  done  with  confidence.  Portions,  of  course,  may 
have  been  omitted  in  process  of  editing. 

But  our  book  is  not  a  collection  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies, 
but  a  rough  equivalent  of  what  we  should  call  "  The  Life, 
Times,  and  Works  of  Jeremiah."  It  is  nowhere  stated  that 
the  narratives  it  contains  were  written  by  Jeremiah,  nor,  for 
the  most  part,  is  there  anything  to  suggest  that  they  were. 
On  the  other  hand,  they  are  evidently,  in  the  main,  the 
work  of  a  well-informed  contemporary,  very  probably  the 
prophet's  secretary,  Baruch.  In  adding  these  narratives  to 
his  roll,  he  probably  also  added  Jeremiah's  later  prophecies, 
partly  from  the  prophet's  notes,  partly  from  his  own  re- 
miniscences. The  dependence  on  the  Book  of  Kings  in 
its  final  form,  and  the  probable  presence  of  post-exilic 
material,  show  that  our  book  did  not  take  its  present  shape 
till  after  the  Exile.  The  imperfect  chronological  arrangement 
shows  that  the  editors  did  not  allow  the  contents  of  Baruch's 
roll  to  remain  together  in  their  original  form.    Cf.  Appendix  D. 

(d)  Hebrew  and  Greek  Editions. — The  LXX.  differs  very 
widely  from  the  Hebrew  Text.  There  are  numerous  variations, 
transpositions,  omissions,  and  additions.  It  is  commonly 
stated  that  there  are  about  2700  words  contained  in  the 
Hebrew  and  not  in  the  LXX.  The  most  important  omissions 
are:  x.  6-8,  Unique  Supremacy  of  Jehovah;  xxxiii.  14-26, 
The  Branch,  and  the  Covenant  with  the  Levites  and  David ; 
xxxix.  4-13,  Fall  of  Jerusalem ;  xlviii.  45  f.,  On  Heshbon,  in 
Oracle  on  Moab ;  lii.  28-30,  Statistics  as  to  captives. 

The  Utterances  on  the  Nations  are  inserted  in  the  middle, 
after  xxv.  13,  as  in  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel,  instead  of  almost  at 

1  This  verse  is  rejected  by  Giesebrecht,  but  accepted  by  Rothstein 
(Kautzsch)  and  Cornill. 


200  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

the  end,  chh.  46-49-  They  are  also  arranged  in  the  order, 
Elam,  Egypt,  Babylon,  Philistines,  Edom,  Ammon,  Kedar, 
Damascus,  Moab;  instead  of  the  order  of  the  Hebrew 
Text,  Egypt,  Philistines,  Moab,  Ammon,  Edom,  Damascus, 
Kedar,  Babylon.  In  minor  variations  the  correct  text  is  to 
be  found  sometimes  in  the  one  edition,  sometimes  in  the 
other;  but  the  longer  passages  absent  from  the  LXX.  are 
probably  editorial  additions  in  the  Hebrew  Text.  They  do 
not  show  that  such  editorial  expansion  continued  after  the  LXX.^ 
was  translated,  but  only  that  when  that  translation  was  made, 
at  least  two  very  different  editions  of  the  book  were  still  current. 

(e)  Co7ite?its. 

I.-VI.,  Originally  Composed  in  the  Earlier  Part  of 
Josiah's  Reign,  c.  628-621. 

i.,  Thirteenth  Year  of  Josiah,  628.  Jeremiah's  Call  to  the 
prophetic  office,  to  which  God  appointed  him  before  his 
birth.  His  mission  "  to  pluck  up,  break  down,  destroy,  and 
overthrow;  to  build  and  plant."  Visions  of  Almond  Tree, 
suggesting  by  paronomasia  God's  watchfulness;  and  of 
Seething  Caldron  symbolising  a  Northern  Invader.  The 
prophet  will  be  in  opposition  to  kings,  princes,  and  priests, 
and  will  not  be  crushed  by  them. 

ii.,  Jerusalem  and  Israel,  once  devoted  to  Jehovah,  have 
ungratefully  deserted  Him,  being  less  faithful  than  the  Gentiles 
to  their  false  gods.  They  have  intrigued  with  Egypt  and 
Assyria.  All  classes,  kings,  princes,  priests,  prophets,  and 
people,  are  guilty. 

iii.  1-5,  Idolatry  and  foreign  intrigues  punished  by  drought ; 
will  not  the  people  repent?    Cf.  iii.  19  ff. 

iii.  6-18,  Time  of  Josiah.     Judah  did  not  take  warning 

by   the   fate    of    Israel,    but    surpassed   her    in    wickedness. 

Invitation  to  Israel  to  repent.     Lost  ark  not  to  be  replaced, 

verse  16.     Promise  of  reconciliation  of  Judah  and  Israel  at 

Jerusalem,  whither  all  nations  will  gather  to  worship  Jehovah, 

17  f. 

Interrupts  the  connection  between  verses  5  and  19.  Giesebrecht 
connects  6-13  with  19-iv.  2;  14-18  being  a  later  insertion,  14-16  from 


JEREMIAH  201 

some  other  prophecy  of  Jeremiah.  Verses  17  f.  late  gloss,  Cornill, 
Giesebrecht,  Cheyne;^  Smend'  rejects  16-18,  and  understands  iii.  as 
predicting  the  final  ruin  of  Judah,  and  the  restoration  of  Israel. 

iii.  19-iv.  2,  Penitent  Israel  shall  be  accepted  by  Jehovah. 

iv.  3-vi.   30,  Description,  interspersed  with  appeals  to  the 

Jews  to  repent,  of  a  terrible  invasion  by  a  northern  people, 

as  a  punishment  of  the  guilt  of  all  classes,  in  spite  of  their 

assiduous  sacrifices  to  Jehovah. 

Referring  originally  to  the  Scythian  inroads  c.  628,  but  perhaps  adapted 
to  the  Babylonians  when  the  earlier  prophecies  were  rewritten  in  the  fifth 
year  of  Jehoiakim,  xxxvi.  32. 

VII.-X.,  The  Beginning  of  Jehoiakim's  Reign,  608. 

^  No  danger  seems  imminent ;  which  suits  the  situation  after  the  sub- 
mission to  Pharaoh  Necho,  and  before  his  defeat  at  Carchemish  by 
Nebuchadnezzar.     Cf.  also  vii.  and  xxvi. 

vii.  1-28,  Jeremiah  is  commanded  to  stand  at  the  gate 
of  the  Temple,  and  appeal  to  the  people  to  repent.  Unless 
they  reform  social  wrongs  and  forsake  the  superstitious 
worship  of  the  Queen  of  Heaven  and  "other  gods," 
neither  the  sanctity  of  the  Temple  nor  their  many  sacrifices 
to  Jehovah  will  protect  them.  The  Temple  at  Jerusalem  will 
perish  as  did  that  at  Shiloh.  "  But  they  will  not  hearken  unto 
thee." 

vii.  29-viii.  3,  Because  the  Jews  have  sacrified  children  in 
the  Valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnom,  the  land  shall  be  laid 
waste,  the  valley  choked  with  corpses  on  which  the  birds 
and  beasts  shall  feed ;  the  bones  of  the  dead  shall  be  exposed 
before  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  which  they  worshipped,  and 
the  living  shall  long  for  death.     Cf.  xix.  3-19. 

viii.  4-ix.  22,^  Lamentation  over  Judah,  its  obstinate  sin 
and  sure  punishment,  by  failure  of  crops,  by  invasion,  the 
ruin  of  the  cities,^  the  death  or  captivity  of  the  people. 

ix.  23-26;^  23  f.  is  a  proverbial  maxim;  man  should  glory 
not  in  strength  or  riches,  but  in  God's  goodness  and  righteous- 
ness. 25  f.  threaten  Egypt,  Judah,  and  their  neighbours  with 
punishment,  because  they  are  uncircumcised  in  heart. 

*  Introdtution  to  Isaiah,  p.  II.        ^  ^^  f.  Theol.,  237.         »  Heb.  21. 

*  viii.  13,  16,  ix.  II,  16,  21,  22.       '  Heb.  22-25. 


202  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

23-26  interrupt  the  connection  between  22  and  x.  17,  and  were  rejected 
by  Kuenen,^  but  are  probably  genuine,  but  misplaced. ^ 

X.  I -1 6,  The  contrast  between  Jehovah,  the  one  true  God, 
Creator  and  Ruler  of  the  Universe,  and  the  idols  of  the 
Gentiles. 

Interrupts  the  connection  between  22  and  x.  17  ;  parallel  to  and  prob- 
ably dependent  on  Isaiah  xl.  19-22,  etc.,  often  regarded  as  exilic  or  post- 
exilic'    Verse  11  is  in  Aramaic,  and  is  probably  a  later  gloss. 

X.  17-25,  Conclusion  of  viii.  4-ix.  22. 

Verse  25,  which  implies  that  Judah  is  already  desolate,  may  have  been 
added  by  Jeremiah  later.* 

XI.-XX.,  Originally  composed  in  Jehoiakim's  Reign.^ 

xi.  1-17,  The  prophet  recalls  his  zeal  for  God's  covenant 
with  Israel — probably  Deuteronomy^ — denounces  the  failure 
of  the  people  to  observe  it,  and  threatens  them  with  punish- 
ment. 

xi.  18-xii.  6,  Jeremiah's  priestly  kinsmen  at  Anathoth  to  be 
punished  because  they  persecuted  him. 

xii.  7-17,  Judah  raided  by  her  neighbours  (7-13),  who  will 
be  punished  with  exile,  but  restored  if  they  adopt  the  religion 
of  Israel  (14-17). 

Often  connected  with  the  raids  of  the  "  bands "  of  Chaldi^eans,  Syrians, 
Ammonites,  and  Moabites,  about  the  ninth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  c.  600.'' 
Jeremiah's  authorship  of  14-17  has  been  challenged.^  For  the  restoration 
of  Moab  and  Ammon,  cf.  xlviii.  47,  xlix.  6 ;  also  xlix.  39  (Elam). 

xiii.  i-ii.  The  ruin  of  Judah  symbolised  by  a  girdle  spoilt 
by  being  buried  near  the  Euphrates. 

xiii.  1 2-1 7,  All  classes  of  the  people  shall  be  filled  with  the 
wrath  of  God,  like  a  bottle  with  wine. 

xiii.  18,  19,  Lament  over  the  king,  the  queen-mother,  and 
the  desolate  land. 

Probably  referring  to  the  captivity  of  Jehoiachin,  a  youth  of  eighteen, 
whose  mother,  Nehushta,  is  mentioned  ii.  Kings  xxiv.  8,  12. 

xiii.  20-27,  The  ingrained  sin  of  Jerusalem  —  "Can  the 
Ethiopian  change  his  skin,  or  the  leopard  his  spots?" — 
punished  by  shame  and  ruin. 

^   Ap.  GlESEBRECHT,  i.  I.  '  GlESEBRECHT,  CORNILL. 

3  GlESEBRECHT,  CoRNiLL,  RoTHSTEiN,  (Kautzsch),  who  also  regard 
II  as  a  still  later  addition.     Cheyne,  Origin  of  the  Psalter^  p.  333. 
*  Corn  ILL,  gloss.         *  For  the  most  part.         *  ii.  Kings  xxiii  3, 
'  ii.  Kings  xxiv.  2.        ^  Stade,  ap.  Giesbbrecht. 


JEREMIAH  203 

xiv.  i-xvii.  18,  On  the  occasion  of  a  drought,  Jeremiah 
announces  that  the  people  will  be  consumed  by  the  sword,  by 
famine,  and  by  pestilence;  the  rest  will  go  into  captivity. 
Appeals  for  mercy  are  repeated  and  rejected,  "  Though  Moses 
and  Samuel  stood  before  Me,  yet  My  mind  could  not  be 
towards  this  people."  Prophets  who  contradict  Jeremiah  shall 
be  punished.  Jeremiah  complains  of  his  unwelcome  message 
and  the  ill-will  it  excites,  and  is  repeatedly  encouraged.  He 
must  not  marry  or  take  part  in  any  festivity. 

Verses  xv.  11-14,  xvi.  14-16,  interrupt  the  context,  xv.  13  f.  being 
borrowed  from  xvii.  3  f.,  and  xvi.  14  f.  from  xxiii.  7  f.  Similarly  xvi. 
18-21  is  wholly  or  partly  a  misplaced  fragment,  and  xvii.  11-13,  at  any 
rate,  out  of  place.  ^ 

xvii.  19-27,  The  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  the  condition 
of  national  salvation. 

The  parallels  to  Nehemiah  xiii.  15  ff.,  the  interest  in  the  Sabbath,  and 
in  sacrifices  are  unusual  in  Jeremiah.^  The  style,  however,  is  either 
Jeremiah's  or  modelled  on  xxii.  i  flF.,^  cf.  too  Ezekiel  xx.  21,  24. 

xviii.-xx.,  The  Potter  a  type  of  the  Divine  Sovereignty. 
God's  threats  or  promises  conditional  on  perseverance  in  sin 
or  righteousness.  The  doom  of  Israel.  Plots  against  Jeremiah. 
He  prays  for  the  punishment  of  his  persecutors.  The  breaking 
of  a  potter's  earthern  vessel,  which  cannot  be  mended,  a 
symbol  of  the  irrevocable  ruin  of  Judah.*  Jeremiah  addresses 
the  people  at  the  Temple,  and  is  beaten  and  put  in  the  stocks 
by  Pashhur,  whose  punishment  will  be,  that  he  and  all  the 
Jews  who  survive  the  sack  of  Jerusalem  will  be  carried  to 
Babylon.  Jeremiah  again  prays  for  the  punishment  of  his 
persecutors,  and  curses  the  day  of  his  birth. 

Cf.  Job  iii.  i-io  with  which  xx.  14-18  will  have  some  literary  connec- 
tion, probably  Job  is  dependent  on  Jeremiah.  Stade  and  Dillmann^ 
regard  xx.  14  ff.  as  a  later  addition.  Davidson,  however,  seems  to 
consider  xx.  14  ff.  independent  of  Job,  and  therefore  the  original. 

*  GlESEBRECHT. 

*  ROTHSTEIN  (Kautzsch),  CORNILL,  GlESEBRECHT,  KAYSER-MARTI, 
p.  157,  Cheyne,  Introd.  to  Isaiah^  p.  312,  "post-exilic." 

'  GlESEBRECHT,  **  Gut  jeremianisch  ist,  doch  ist  es  moglich,  dies  mit 
Kuenen  aus  absichtlicher  Imitation  zu  erklaren  "  ;  Driver,  p.  242,  "  The 
style  is  thoroughly  that  of  Jeremiah." 

*  xix.  3-9,  I  lb- 13,  which  are  largely  based  on  vii.  32-viii.  4,  ii.  Kings 
xxi.  16,  xxii.  10-13,  are  held  by  Gicsebrecht  to  be  a  later  insertion. 

^  Ap.  KONIG. 


204  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

XXI.-XXIX.,  Passages  of  Various  Dates. 

xxi.  i-io,  During  the  last  siege,  588,  Zedekiah  sends  to  ask 
concerning  the  fate  of  the  city,  Jeremiah  replies  that  the  city 
will  be  taken,  sacked,  and  burnt,  and  that  the  only  way  of 
escape  is  desertion  to  the  Chaldeans. 

xxi.  I  i-xxii.  9,  Appeal  to  the  court,  "  the  house  of  the  king 
of  Judah  "  to  rule  justly  as  the  condition  of  national  salvation.^ 

This  passage  and  the  sections  to  xxiii.  8  are  commonly  considered 
a  collection  of  prophecies  uttered  originally  at  different  times,  and  com- 
bined soon  after  the  captivity  of  Jehoiachin,  c.  597. 

xxii.  10-30,  Judgments  on  Shallum  (Jehoahaz),  Jehoiakim, 
and  Coniah  (Jehoiachin),  c.  597. 

xxiii.,  Denunciation  of  shepherds,  /.^.,  princes,  priests,  and 
especially  prophets,  including  a  promise  of  good  shepherds,  4, 
and  of  the  righteous  Branch  (gemah)  of  David,  under  whom 
Judah  and  Israel  shall  be  restored  5-8,  cf,  xxxiii.  14-16. 

Probably  under  Jehoiakim. 

xxiv.,  Jeconiah  (Jehoiachin)  and  his  fellow  captives  sym- 
Dolised  by  a  basket  of  good  figs,  but  the  Jews  left  in  Judah 
by  a  basket  of  bad  figs. 

Early  in  Zedekiah's  reign. 

xxv..  Fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  First  of  Nebuchadrezzar, 
605.  The  Jews  are  to  be  subdued,  and  their  land  laid  waste 
by  "my  Servant  Nebuchadrezzar"  and  the  Chaldaeans,  because 
they  refused  to  listen  to  the  appeals  of  the  prophets.  They 
shall  serve  Babylon  seventy  years,  then  shall  Babylon  be 
punished,  11-14.  All  nations  shall  drink  the  cup  of  God's 
wrath.     Last  of  all  Sheshach  (/.^.,  Babylon)  shall  drink,  26b. 

26b  is  probably  a  later  gloss.  ^  Giesebrecht,  also,  considers  11-14,  30-38 
later  additions,  verse  13b  is  clearly  a  gloss. 

xxvi.,  "  In  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,"  Jere- 
miah threatens  that  the  Temple,  like  that  at  Shiloh,  will  be 
destroyed,  is  accused  of  blasphemy,  but  rescued  by  his  friends 
among  the  princes.     Cf,  vii.-x. 

xxvii.-xxix.,  Jeremiah's  Controversy  with  the  Prophets. 
The  prophets,  especially  Hananiah,  encouraged  rebellion 
against  Babylon,  and  contradicted  Jeremiah's  threats.     Death 

*  Cf,  xvii.  19  ff.  -  RoTHSTElN  (Kautzsch),  Cornill,  etc. 


JEREMIAH  205 

of    Hananiah.      Jeremiah  and  the  prophets  in  exile,  who 
supported  Hananiah,  denounce  each  other  by  letter. 

xxvii.  3,  4,  xxviii.  i  show  that  this  controversy  took  place  in  the  earlier 
years  of  Zedekiah's  reign,  and  that  Zedekiah  should  be  read  for  Jehoiakim 
in  xxvii.  i. 

XXX-XXXIII,  Prophecies  of  Restoration. 

These  are  combined  with  a  narrative  referring  to  events  "in  the  tenth 
year  of  Zedekiah,"  588,  during  the  last  siege  ^;  xxxiii.  is  expressly  dated 
in  this  period,  to  which  xxx. ,  xxxi.  may  also  be  assigned.  The  narrative 
and  the  compilation  of  the  section  will  be  the  work  of  the  editor.  The 
Jeremianic  origin  of  the  prophecies  in  these  chapters  has  been  contested. 
According  to  Smend,'  xxx.  f.  presuppose  the  post-exilic  historical  situation, 
and  are  dependent  on  II.  Isaiah,  e.g.^  "Jacob,  my  servant."  '  Giesebrecht 
ascribes  comparatively  little  to  Jeremiah."*  Doubtless  editorial  additions ' 
have  given  a  post-exilic  or  exilic  colouring  to  these  chapters,  otherwise 
they  are  substantially  Jeremiah's," 

XXX.,  When  calamity  has  shown  that  foreign  alliances  and 
all  human  help  are  useless,  Jehovah  Himself  will  deliver  His 
people,  bring  them  back  to  their  own  land,  and  set  over  them 
"  David,  their  king,"  i.e.^  a  prince  of  the  House  of  David. 

Verses  10  f.,  apparently  dependent  on  II.  Isaiah,^  or  vice  versa,  are 
rejected  by  Cornill,  also  22-24.     Verses  23  f.,  at  least,  are  out  of  place. 

xxxi.,  Ephraim  and  Judah  shall  be  reconciled  at  Zion,  and 
share  the  renewed  mercy  of  Jehovah.  God  will  make  a  new 
covenant  with  them,  whereby  each  will  be  directly  taught  of 
Him,  and  there  will  be  no  need  of  human  teachers. 

Two  passages  are  often  held  to  be  later  additions ;  35-37,  Israel  shall 
abide  while  sun  and  moon  endure,  in  which  35  is  in  the  style  of  II.  Isaiah, 
cf.  Isaiah  li.  15^  ;  and  38-40,  the  future  dimensions  of  Jerusalem,  which  is 
certainly  out  of  place  here.® 

xxxii.  (narrative,  6-25  in  first  person),  During  the  last  siege, 
Jeremiah  buys  a  field  at  Anathoth,  as  a  sign  that  the  Jews  will 
return  from  exile  to  occupy  their  old  inheritance. 

*  xxxii.  I.  ^  A.T.  Theol.,  pp.  239  flf.  '  xxx.  10. 

*  Only  xxxii.  6-1 7a,  24-44  are  actually  Jeremiah's,  while  xxxi.  2-6, 
15-20,  27-34,  xxxiii.  I,  4-13  are  the  reminiscences  of  Baruch  ;  the  rest  is 
due  to  later  editors.  ^  See  below. 

8  Driver  (apparently),  Cornill,  Konig,  Kayser-Marti,  115, 
ROTHSTEIN  (Kautzsch). 

7  Cf.  Isaiah  xli.  13,  xliii.  5,  xliv.  2. 

*  Cornill,  Giesebrecht. 

"  RoTHSTEiN  (Kautzsch),  Giesebrecht. 


2o6  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Verses  17-23,  the  somewhat  abstract  introduction  to  Jeremiah's  prayer, 
may  be  a  later  addition.^ 

xxxiii.  1-16,  Renewed  promises  of  restoration,  and  of  the 

Branch  (^emah)  of  David. 

The  form  of  this  section  seems  affected  by  the  actual  experiences  of  the 
Captivity,  especially  in  11-14.  Verses  14-16  are  chiefly  a  repetition  of 
xxiii.  5  f.,  but  here  it  is  Jerusalem  and  not  the  Branch  which  is  named 
"Jehovah  our  Righteousness." 

xxxiii.,  17-26,  The  House  of  David  and  the  Levites  shall 
remain  and  flourish,  as  long  as  day  and  night  endure. 

This  section  is  not  in  the  LXX.,  and  the  keen  interest  in  the  Levites 
has  no  parallel  elsewhere  in  the  book ;  hence  the  verses  are  probably  an 
addition.'^ 

XXXIV.,  XXXV.,  Utterances  on  Specified  Occasions. 

xxxiv.,  During  the  Last  Siege,  Zedekiah,  after  the  Fall  of 
the  City,  will  be  taken  to  Babylon,  but  his  life  will  be  spared, 
1-7.  The  nobles  to  be  punished,  because  when  the  siege  was 
raised  for  a  time,  they  re-enslaved  the  Jews  whom  they  had 
emancipated. 

xxxv.,  "  In  the  days  of  Jehoiakim."   The  Jews  put  to  shame 

by  the  loyalty  of  the  Rechabites  to  their  tribal  customs. 

About  597,  the  Rechabites  being  probably  driven  into  the  city  by  the 
troubles  at  the  end  of  Jehoiakim's  reign. 

XXXVI.-XLV.,  A  History  of  Jeremiah. 

xxxvi..  Fourth  Year  of  Jehoiakim,  605.  One  roll  of  Jere- 
miah's prophecies  burnt  by  the  king,  and  another  written. 

xxxvii.-xxxix.,  Jeremiah,  arrested  as  a  deserter,  during  the 
temporary  raising  of  the  last  siege,  is  beaten  and  imprisoned. 
He  persists  in  urging  the  king  to  submit,  and  the  people  to 
desert,  is  thrown  into  a  muddy  oubliette,  but  released  by  Ebed- 
melech,  repeats  his  prophecies  to  the  king,  and  is  kept  in 
prison  till  the  sack  of  the  city,  when  he  is  released  by  the 
express  orders  of  Nebuchadrezzar.  Ebed-melech  is  promised 
his  life. 

Verses  xxxix,  i,  2  are  taken  from  ii.  Kings  xxv.  1-4  (Jeremiah  lii.  4-7); 
and  4-13  from  ii.  Kings  xxv.  4-12  (Jeremiah  lii.  7-16) ;  4-13  are  not  in  the 
LXX.,  and  are  probably  a  later  addition. 

1   ROTHSTEIN  (Kautzsch),  CORNILL,  GlESEBRECHT. 

*  RoTHSTEiN  (Kautzsch),  CoRNiLL,  GlESEBRECHT ;  and,  Driver, 
p.  247,  "  the  majority  of  recent  critics." 


JEREMIAH  207 

xl.-xliv.,  Jeremiah  is  released  from  among  the  captives,  and 
joins  GedaHah,  the  new  governor  of  Judah.  Gedaliah  is 
murdered  by  Ishmael.  Jeremiah  is  rescued  from  Ishmael 
by  Johanan,  and  carried,  against  his  will,  into  Egypt,  where 
he  denounces  the  worship  of  the  Queen  of  Heaven  by  the 
exiles,  and  foretells  the  ruin  of  Egypt  and  the  refugees. 

xlv.,  "  Fourth  Year  of  Jehoiakim,"  Baruch  is  promised  that 
his  life  shall  be  spared. 

XLVI.-LI.,  Prophecies  against  Foreign  Nations. 

The  prospect  of  a  Chaldsean  invasion  after  the  Battle  of  Carchemish, 
605,  probably  furnished  Jeremiah  with  an  occasion  for  dealing  with  foreign 
nations. 

Smend^  and  Kayser- Marti  ^  deny  the  Jeremianic  authorship  of  this 
section.  Smend  considers  that  the  prophet  who  was  so  preoccupied 
with  the  sin  and  doom  of  Judah  could  not  have  exulted  in  a  national 
Judaistic  spirit  over  the  ruin  of  foreign  nations.  Some  use,  however, 
may  have  been  made  of  Jeremianic  material.  Giesebrecht,  however,  holds 
that  Jeremiah  delivered  a  series  of  utterances  on  foreign  nations ;  assigns 
xlvii.,  xlix.  7- 1 1  to  Baruch's  reminiscences;  and  thinks  that  xlvi.  2-12, 
Egypt,  rests  on  a  Jeremianic  basis ;  elsewhere  anything  of  Jeremiah's  is 
editorially  disguised  beyond  recognition. 

xlvi.,  Egypt,  On  the  eve  of  the  Battle  of  Carchemish,  605, 
Pharaoh  Necho's  defeat  is  foretold,  1-12;  and,  after  the 
defeat,  the  conquest  of  Egypt,  and  its  ultimate  restoration, 
13-26. 

Verses  27  f.  =xxx.  10  f.  are  an  insertion. 

xlvii..  The  Philistines  spoiled  by  the  Chaldaeans. 

According  to  i  "  before  Pharaoh  smote  Gaza,"  which,  however,  LXX, 
omits.     Probably  605. 

xlviii.,  Moab  and  its  cities  are  doomed. 

Parallel  to  Isaiah  xv.,  xvi.,  q.v. 

xlix.  1-6,  Ammon,  its  captivity  and  restoration. 

xlix.  7-22,  Edom,  its  mountain  strongholds  to  be  sacked  by 
the  nations. 

xlix.  23-27,  Fall  of  Damascus. 

A  mosaic,  23b  -=  Isaiah  Ivii.  20  ;  24b  =  Isaiah  xiii.  8 ;  25  =  Isaiah  xxii.  i  f. ; 
26  =  1.  30;  27  =  Amos  i.  14.  We  know  nothing  that  suggests  that  Damascus 
was  within  the  range  of  Jeremiah's  political  interests.  The  section  is, 
however,  accepted  by  Cornill. 

xlix.  28-33,  Kedar  and  Hazor,  Nomad  tribes  of  Arabia. 
»  A,  T.  Theol,,  pp.  238  f.  «  Ibid.,  p.  115. 


2o8  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

xlix.  34-39,  Elam,  its  doom  and  restoration. 
Verse  34,  not  in  LXX.,  assigns  this  passage  to  the  beginning  of 
Zedekiah's  reign. 

I.,  li.,  Babylon,  A  prophecy  or  series  of  prophecies,  exulting 
over  the  miserable  ruin  of  Babylon,  as  a  punishment  for  her 
ill-treatment  of  the  Jews.  The  Jewish  exiles  are  urged  to 
flee  from  the  doomed  city.  A  note,  li.  59-64,  is  added, 
stating  that  Jeremiah  wrote  the  doom  of  Babylon  in  a  book, 
and  gave  it  to  Seraiah,  Zedekiah's  chamberlain,  to  take  to 
Babylon,  read  it  there,  tie  a  stone  to  it,  and  throw  it  into 
the  Euphrates.  This  book  is  probably  intended  to  be 
identified  with  1.,  li.  Chapter  li.  ends:  "Thus  far  are  the 
words  of  Jeremiah." 

These  chapters  are  generally  regarded  as  exilic,  with  post-exilic 
additions.  The  historical  situation  is  that  of  the  Exile.  The  Jews 
are  in  Chaldea/  the  Temple  and  Jerusalem  in  ruins,'  Babylon  is 
menaced  by  a  confederation  of  nations,  led  by  the  Medes.'  The 
religious  situation,  too,  is  not  that  of  Jeremiah.  He  is  overwhelmed 
with  the  sense  of  Judah's  sin  and  its  punishment  by  Nebuchadrezrar, 
the  Servant  of  Jehovah.  Here,  the  situation  is  that  of  11.  Isaiah ; 
Judah's  sin  is  forgotten,  Judah's  suffering,  and  the  sin  and  chastisement 
of  Babylon  for  destroying  Jerusalem  occupy  the  writer's  mind.*  Much 
of  the  section  is  borrow^  from  the  rest  of  the  book  and  from  other 
literature,  after  the  manner  of  other  secondary  passages  in  Jeremiah.^ 
Except  for  such  borrowing,  the  style  is  not  that  of  Jeremiah. 

LIL,  Historical  Appendix. 

An  account  of  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  release  of 
Jehoiachin  from  prison. 

Verses  1-27,  3i-34=ii.  Kings  xxiv.  i8-xxv.  21,  xxv.  27-30,  from 
which  they  are  taken.     Verses  28-30  are  absent  from  the  LXX. 

(f)  Teaching, — Jeremiah  repeats  the  protests  of  his  pre- 
decessors against  social  wrong,^  superstitious  and  idolatrous^ 
worship,  at  the  high  places  ^  and  elsewhere,  and  the  com- 
bination of  external  devotion  to  Jehovah  with  a  selfish, 
immoral  life;^  and,  like  them,  he  announces  the  ruin  and 
restoration  of  Judah  and  Israel,  and  the  ultimate  universalism 

I  1.  8,  33.  li.  6,  45-  M.28,  li.  II,  sof. 

3  1.  9,  41-43,  li.  II,  27  f.  *  1.  20,  li.  10,  33-44. 

»  1.  40-46  =  xlix.  18,  vi.  22-24,  xlix.  19-21;  li.  I5-I9  =  x.  12-16; 
cf,  1.  39  with  Isaiah  xiii.  21  f.  "  xxii.  3,  vii.  5-7. 

'  ii.  20,  27,  iii.  13.  ^  xvii.  2. 

•  vi.  20,  vii.  21  fF. 


JEREMIAH  209 

of  true  religion.^  The  exact  relation  of  Jeremiah  to  Deuter- 
onomy v.-xxvi.  is  a  difficult  problem.  Its  ordinances  seek 
to  realise  Jeremiah's  ideals,  and  his  teaching  must  have 
favoured  its  acceptance  and  subsequent  observance;  indeed, 
in  xi.2  he  appears  as  its  champion.  The  release  of  Jewish 
slaves  brought  about  by  Jeremiah  during  the  last  siege  was 
in  accordance  with  a  law  borrowed  by  Deuteronomy  from 
the  older  codes.^  But  Jeremiah's  later  teaching  goes  beyond 
Deuteronomy.  Indeed  the  prestige  which  Josiah's  reforms 
gave  to  the  Temple  as  the  only  legitimate  sanctuary  of 
Jehovah  helped  the  people  to  harden  their  hearts  against  the 
prophet's  teaching.  The  people  appealed  against  him  to  a 
written  law,  "  We  are  wise,  and  the  law  of  Jehovah  is  with  us," 
but  he  replied,  "The  false  pen  of  the  scribes  hath  wrought 
falsely."*  We  need  not  suppose  that  Jeremiah  refers  to 
Deuteronomy;^  but  it  is  clear  that  the  written  law  had 
assumed  a  form  against  which  the  prophet  was  compelled 
to  protest,  and  that  editors  were  already  busy  expanding 
and  interpreting  its  contents.  His  experience  of  the  use- 
lessness  of  any  written  law  as  the  basis  of  the  covenant 
between  Jehovah  and  Israel  led  him  to  the  great  utterance, 
xxxi.  31-37,  which  is  one  of  those  in  which  O.T.  Revelation 
most  nearly  anticipates  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  and  according 
to  which  God's  covenant  with  His  people  does  not  rest  on 
written  law,  on  a  prophetic  order  or  a  priesthood,  but  on  the 
spiritual  fellowship  of  the  believer  with  God.  The  same 
truth  is  illustrated  by  Jeremiah's  isolation.  In  him  the 
antagonism  of  the  inspired  prophets  to  the  prophetic  order 
and  the  priesthood  reached  its  climax.  He  is,  after  Christ 
Himself,  the  great  example  that  Divine  Revelation  often 
comes  as  a  protest  against  the  traditional  teaching  of  con- 
stituted authorities. 

In  dealing  with  eclecticism,  too,  Jeremiah  follows  in  the 
footsteps  of  his  predecessors,  but  the  issue  is  more  clearly 

^  iii.  17  (if.  2  QT  Contents  i.  1. 

^  Cf.  xxxiv.  13;  14  with  Exodus  xxi.  2,  Deut.  xv.  12. 

*  viii.  8.  *  Wellhausen,  History  of  Israel,  403  n. 


210  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

stated.  The  people  worshipped  the  heavenly  bodies,  and  other 
deities,  yet  they  could  say  "  I  am  not  defiled,  I  have  not  gone 
after  the  Baalim,"  and  saw  no  reason  why  they  should  not 
appeal  to  Jehovah  for  help  in  time  of  trouble.^  By  his 
demonstration  of  the  folly  and  sin  of  asssociating  "other 
gods"  with  Jehovah,  Jeremiah  prepared  the  way  for  the 
explicit  statement  of  monotheism. 

Moreover,  Jeremiah  stands  out  as  a  great  example  of 
personal  religion,  in  his  unflinching  proclamation  of  an  un- 
popular message,  in  his  sympathy  and  intercessions  for  his 
people,  in  his  earnest  pleading  with  God,  and  in  his  sub- 
mission to  the  Divine  will. 

(g)  Use  171  N.T. — Our  Lord's  phrase,  "den  of  thieves," 
Matthew  xxi.  13,  etc.,  is  from  vii.  11;  "Rachel  weeping  for 
her  children,"  Matthew  ii.  18,  from  xxxi.  15  ;  the  great  passage 
on  the  New  Covenant,  xxxi.  31-37,  is  applied  to  Christianity 
in  Hebrews  viii.  8-12,  x.  16  f.,  Romans  xi.  27,  and  probably 
suggested  the  phrase  "  new  covenant "  in  the  words  of  institu- 
tion of  the  Lord's  Supper.  Cf.  also  ix.  24  and  i.  Corinthians  i. 
31,  ii.  Corinthians  x.  17.  There  are  also  numerous  parallels 
in  the  Apocalypse. 

8.  Lamentations. 

(a)  Titk^  Datgy  and  Authorship. — In  the  Hebrew  text,  the 
heading  is  simply  ^Ekhdy  the  opening  word  of  the  book;  in 
the  LXX.,  Threnoi  or  Threnoi  Hiereyniou,  and  in  the  Vulg. 
Threfiiy  hence  our  Lamentations.  The  LXX.  and  Vulg. 
represent  the  Hebrew  0;i^//i  =  "  Lamentations,"  by  which 
name  the  book  is  referred  to  in  the  Talmud,  etc. 

In  ii.  Chronicles  xxxv.  25  we  read  that  "Jeremiah  composed 
a  lamentation  for  Josiah,  which  was  uttered  by  all  the  male 
and  female  singers  in  their  lamentations  {qhioth)  over  Josiah 
unto  this  day,  and  it  became  a  custom  in  Israel,  and 
behold  they  {i.e.,  the  lamentations  of  the  smgers,  including 
that  of  Jeremiah)  are  written  in  (the  Book  of)  Lamentations  " 
(*«/  haq-qmdth).^    This  passage  evidently  refers  to  Lamenta- 

1  ii.  23,  27,  '^  Substantially  as  Kautzsch  ;  cf,  R.V. 


LAMENTATIONS  211 

tions ;  it  has  been  held  to  claim  the  whole  book  for  Jeremiah, 
but,  if  the  rendering  given  above  is  correct,  it  merely  states 
that  the  book  includes  a  lamentation  by  Jeremiah. 

In  the  Hebrew  Canon,  Lamentations  is  one  of  the  Five 
Rolls,  Megilloth^  and  is  included  in  the  Hagiographa,  but  the 
LXX.  places  it  after  Jeremiah,  and  prefixes  a  statement  that 
"After  Israel  was  carried  away  captive,  and  Jerusalem  laid 
waste,  Jeremiah  sat  weeping,  and  lamented  this  lamentation 
over  Jerusalem."  The  Old  Latin,  Vulgate,  and  Syriac  versions, 
the  Targum  and  the  Talmud  follow  Chronicles  and  the  LXX. 
in  ascribing  the  book  to  Jeremiah.  The  contents  show  clearly 
that  Chronicles  is  wrong  in  describing  the  book  as  a  lamenta- 
tion over  Josiah ;  it  is,  as  the  LXX.  perceives,  a  lamentation 
over  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  in  586.  Yet  we  have  the  joint 
testimony  of  Chronicles  and  the  LXX.  to  the  authorship  of 
the  whole  or  part  of  the  book  by  Jeremiah. 

But,  though  there  are  parallels  to  the  style  and  teaching  of 
Jeremiah,  and  various  passages  seem  to  have  been  written 
by  an  eye-witness,  a  comparison  of  the  book  with  Jeremiah's 
prophecies  suggests  that  the  tradition  of  his  authorship  is  an 
unsound  conjecture.  He  was  a  prisoner  during  the  sack  of 
the  city,  and  after  his  release  he  actively  co-operated  in  the 
attempt  to  reorganise  the  Jewish  community.  Jeremiah,  who 
had  a  very  poor  opinion  of  Zedekiah,  would  hardly  have 
spoken  of  him  as  "The  breath  of  our  nostrils,  the  anointed 
of  Jehovah  ...  of  whom  we  said,  Under  his  shadow  we 
shall  live  among  the  nations."  ^  We  miss,  too,  any  adequate 
parallel  to  Jeremiah's  emphatic  and  repeated  assertion  that  the 
ruin  of  Judah  was  the  punishment  of  the  sin  of  all  classes  of 
the  community.  Jeremiah  included  priests  and  prophets  in 
his  denunciation,  but  he  would  scarcely  have  laid  the  whole 
responsibility  upon  them.^ 

But  as  each  of  the  five  chapters  is  a  separate  poem,  it  is 
still  possible  that  one  or  more  of  them  may  be  the  work  of 

*  iv.  20. 

'  "  It  is  because  of  the  sins  of  her  prophets,  and  the  iniquities  of  her 
priests,"  iv.  13. 


212  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Jeremiah.  The  vivid  descriptions  of  the  sack  of  Jerusalem  in 
ii.  and  iv.  show  that  these  chapters  were  written  soon  after  the 
event  by  an  eye-witness.  Similar  characteristics  suggest  a 
like  origin  for  v.;  but  the  fact  that  v.  is  the  only  one  of  the 
four  poems,  not  an  acrostic,  points  to  a  different  author; 
unless,  indeed,  the  author  had  collected  twenty-two  suitable 
sentiments,  but  never  found  opportunity  to  shape  them  into 
an  acrostic.  The  different  character  of  the  acrostics  in  i.  and 
iii.^  may  point  to  a  different  authorship.  Moreover  i.  and 
iii.  are  said  to  be  dependent  on  ii.  and  iv.,  and  other  exilic 
literature,  and  therefore  to  be  later.  Though  they  seem  to 
imply  an  exilic  date,  they  are  often  regarded  as  post-exilic. 

(b)  Qitiah  Metre. — This  book  furnishes  the  most  striking 
example  of  the  Hebrew  elegiac  or  Qinah  metre,  according 
to  which  each  of  the  two  or  more  parallel  members  is  divided 
into  two  unequal  parts,  the  former  being  the  longer.  This 
arrangement  gives  the  Unes  a  sort  of  "  dying  fall "  suited  to  a 
melancholy  subject,  y.^.  : 


J      ,     J  All  her  gates  are  desolate,  7' 


Hebrew 
Syllables. 


-her  priests  sigh ;     6 

{Her  virgins  are  afflicted,     6 
— bitter  is  she.  3^ 

Chapters  i.-iv.  of  this  book  are  written  in  this  metre. 
The  English  translation  can  only  partially  represent  this 
peculiarity,  and  it  is  not  strictly  adhered  to  in  the  Hebrew, 
possibly  in  some  measure  through  later  modifications  of  the 
text.  A  good  illustration  of  the  metre  may  be  seen  in 
Dr.  Skinner's  translation  ^  of  Ezekiel  xix.   2-9. 

(c)  Contents, — i..  The  miserable  condition  of  Jerusalem. 

An  alphabetic  acrostic,  following  the  usual  order  of  the  letters  in  the 
Hebrew  alphabet.  A  single  verse  is  given  to  each  letter,  and  each  verse 
contains  three  lines  of  Qinah  metre,  the  first  of  which  begins  with  the 
characteristic  letter. 

ii.,  The  ruin  and  sack  of  Jerusalem. 

An  acrostic,  exactly  resembling  i.,  except  that  it  has  the  order  /V, 
*Ajfin,  instead  of  the  usual  order  'Ayin,  Pe. 

iii.,  The  community,  speaking  mostly  in  the  first  person 
*  See  Contents.  '  Ezekiel^  p.  109. 


EZEKIEL  ,    213 

singular  "I,"  meditates  on  its  sin  and  suffering,  and  on  its 
hopes  of  deliverance  from  God. 

An  acrostic,  exactly  resembling  ii. ,  except  that  each  of  the  three  Qinah 
lines  allotted  to  each  letter  begins  with  that  letter,  and  each  line  is  reckoned 
as  a  separate  verse  ;  cf.  Psalm  cxix. 

iv.,  The  sack  of  Jerusalem,  concluding  with  the  doom  of 
Edom,  and  the  assurance  that  Zion's  punishment  is  ended. 

An  alphabetic  acrostic,  resembling  ii.  and  iii.  in  having  the  unusual 
order  /V,  'Ayz'n.  A  single  verse  is  given  to  each  letter,  and  each  verse 
contains  ^wo  lines  of  Qinah  metre,  the  first  of  which  begins  with  the 
characteristic  letter. 

v.,  The  miserable  condition  of  Jerusalem  and  the  Jews. 

The  poem  contains  22  verses,  the  number  of  letters  in  the  Hebrew 
alphabet ;  but  it  is  not  an  acrostic.  Neither  is  it  in  the  Qinah  metre  ;  but 
consists  of  couplets  in  synonymous  parallelism.^ 

The  book  is  not  used  in  the  N.T. 

9.  Ezekiel. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — The  ascription  of  this  book  to 
Ezekiel  is  generally  accepted,^  and  there  is  no  serious  doubt 
as  to  the  authorship  of  any  considerable  passage.^  The 
ministry  of  Ezekiel  falls  between  592  and  570,  and  the 
book  must  have  been  compiled  towards  its  close.  Our 
knowledge  of  Ezekiel  is  derived  from  the  book  itself;  he 
is  not  mentioned  elsewhere  in  O.T. 

Ezekiel,  the  son  of  Buzi,  was  a  priest  who  was  carried 
captive  with  Jehoiachin,*  597 ;  five  years  later  he  was  called 
to  be  a  prophet.  This  fact,  together  with  the  authority  with 
which  he  speaks  and  the  deference  shown  him,  suggests  that 
he  was  no  longer  in  his  first  youth,  and  this  view  is  confirmed 
by  his  familiarity  with  priestly  ritual,  probably  acquired  as  an 
officiating  priest  at  the  Temple.  During  his  last  ten  years  at 
Jerusalem,  Jehoiakim  was  supporting  the  reaction  from  the 
Deuteronomic  legislation,  and  the  revival  of  earlier  customs, 
in  the  teeth   of    strenuous   and   persistent   opposition   from 

*  See  Psalms. 

2  The  attempts  of  Geiger,  Seinecke,  Zunz,  etc.  to  assign  the  book 
to  the  post-exilic  period  have  met  with  no  success,  and  need  not  be 
considered. 

'  The  most  important  later  addition  is  xxvii.  9b-25a.     See  Contents. 


214  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Jeremiah.  Our  book  shows  a  large  acquaintance  and  sympathy 
with  the  teaching  of  Jeremiah ;  probably  in  these  last  years  at 
Jerusalem,  Ezekiel  was  a  disciple  of  the  older  prophet. 

In  Babylonia  he  was  settled  in  a  colony  of  exiles  at  Tel 
Abib,  by  the  river  Chebar.^  Both  place  and  river  are  un- 
known. His  ministry  began  in  592  ;  in  his  account  of  it, 
it  is  often  difficult  to  distinguish  narratives  of  real  events 
from  descriptions  of  symbolic  figures;  but  the  following 
facts  seem  fairly  certain.  The  Jewish  exiles  at  Tel  Abib 
formed  a  community  by  themselves,  enjoying  a  kind  of 
municipal  self-government,  with  elders  of  their  own.  The 
prophet,  with  his  wife,  Hved  in  his  own  house;  his  prophetic 
status  was  recognised,  and  the  elders  used  to  come  to  his 
house  to  consult  him.^  Like  Jeremiah,  he  had  a  more 
favourable  opinion  of  the  Jews  in  captivity  than  of  those 
left  in  Judah.^  Yet  he  also  resembled  Jeremiah  in  his 
opposition  to  the  general  social  and  religious  feeling  of  the 
community  amongst  whom  he  ministered,  so  that  he  occupied 
a  position  of  isolation  and  antagonism  towards  his  hearers 
similar  to  that  of  the  older  prophet  at  Jerusalem.  So,  too, 
the  message  of  Ezekiel's  earlier  ministry,  592-586,  was  the 
same  as  Jeremiah's,  the  punishment  of  the  sin  of  Judah 
by  the  overthrow  of  the  state  and  the  captivity  of  the 
people.  Towards  the  close  of  this  period  Ezekiel's  wife 
died.*  There  is  no  mention  of  any  children.  The  prophet's 
bereavement  happened  about  the  beginning  of  the  last  siege 
of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  marked  the  close  of 
his  earlier  public  ministry.  During  this  period,  prophecies 
are  dated  in  the  fifth,  sixth,  seventh,  and  ninth  years  of  the 
captivity  of  Jehoiachin.  But  he  seems  ^  not  to  have  spoken 
in  public  from  the  commencement  of  the  siege  in  the  ninth 
year,  till  the  news  of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  reached  him  at  the 
close  of  the  eleventh  year.^  Prophecies  concerning  Egypt 
were  written  during  the  interval.  "^ 

^  iii.  15.  '  viii.  I,  xiv.  i,  xx.  I. 

*  xxiv.  16-18.  "  Cf.  xxiv.  27  and  xxxiii.  22. 

«  C/.  Contents  for  date. 


EZEKIEL  215 

The  fall  of  Jerusalem  fulfilled  the  earlier  predictions  of 
Ezekiel,  and,  no  doubt,  as  in  the  case  of  Jeremiah,  led  to 
a  fuller  recognition  of  his  prophetic  authority.  He  resumed 
his  ministry  with  a  new  and  happier  message — the  coming 
restoration  of  the  Jews.  According  to  the  dates  given,  this 
period  of  his  work  was  short,  and  was  succeeded  by  a  long 
interval  of  silence;  there  is  no  date  between  the  twelfth 
and  the  twenty-fifth  year.^  During  this  interval  his  faith  in 
the  coming  restoration  had  grown  so  strong,  that,  at  its  close, 
for  the  benefit  of  the  Jews  after  they  should  have  returned 
to  the  Holy  Land,  he  composed  specifications  for  a  new 
Temple,  directions  for  its  services,  and  a  constitution  for  the 
state. 

Probably  he  himself  collected  and  arranged  his  prophecies 
in  their  present  form  not  long  afterwards. 

We  gather  from  xxxiii.  30-33  that  Ezekiel's  preaching  was 
popular,  but  ineffective;  thus,  verse  32,  "Thou  art  unto  them 
as  a  very  lovely  song  of  one  that  hath  a  pleasant  voice  .  .  . 
for  they  hear  thy  words,  but  do  them  not."  Yet  they  grew 
tired  of  his  elaborate  symbols,  "  Ah,  Lord  Jehovah !  they  say 
of  me,  Is  he  not  a  speaker  of  parables  ?  "^ 

The  references  to  the  prophet's  lying  on  his  side  for  390 
days  have  led  to  the  suggestion  that  he  was  subject  to  some 
form  of  catalepsy,  as  a  divinely  appointed  means  of  inspira- 
tion, but  this  and  most  of  the  other  symbolic  actions  are 
purely  figurative  descriptions.^ 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — See  Jeremiah,  with  whom 
Ezekiel  was  contemporary.  No  change  in  the  general  political 
situation  took  place  in  the  interval  between  the  Fall  of  Jeru- 
salem and  the  close  of  Ezekiel's  ministry. 

(c)  Contents, 

L-XXIV.,  Sin  of  Judah  and  its  Punishment. 
i.-iii.    21    (Fifth    Year,*    fourth    month,    July    592),   The 
prophet's  call.     Theophany,  a  living  chariot,  a  confusion  of 

^  xxxii.  17  and  xl.  I.  "^  xx.  49. 

'  The  theory  of  catalepsy  was  suggested  by  Klostermann  ;  against  it  see 
Skinner's  Ezekiel,  p.  55.  *  From  Jehoiachin's  captivity. 


2i6  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

living  creatures,  wheels,  hands,  wings,  faces,  and  eyes ;  above 
them  a  firmament,  above  that  a  vision  of  a  great  sapphire, 
that  seemed  like  a  throne,  and  upon  the  throne  there  seemed 
to  be  the  vision  of  a  man.  Ezekiel  is  sent  to  rebellious  Israel, 
swallows  the  roll  of  a  book,  is  to  be  a  watchman  to  warn  each 
individual. 

iii.  22-27,  Second  appearance  of  the  Glory  of  Jehovah, 
renewed  commission. 

iv.  1-3,  Siege  of  Jerusalem  symbohsed  by  a  drawing  on  a 
tile,  and  by  an  iron  pan. 

iv.  4-17,  Length  and  distress  of  siege  symbolised  by  time 
spent  (figuratively)  by  the  prophet  without  moving,  and  by 
repulsive  food  eaten  (figuratively)  by  him. 

v..  Burning  of  Jerusalem,  massacre  of  part  of  population, 
and  grievous  captivity  of  the  rest  symboUsed  by  burning, 
smiting  with  a  sword,  and  blowing  away  of  hairs. 

vi.,  vii.,  Ruin  of  the  people  and  the  land,  especially  of  the 
mountains,  which  were  the  scenes  of  idolatry. 

viii.  (Sixth  year,  sixth  ^  month,  September,  591),  Vision  of 
idolatrous  worship  in  the  Temple,  the  "  Image  of  Jealousy," 
Animal  Worship,  Weeping  for  Tammuz,  Sun  Worship. 

ix.-xii..  Destruction  of  Jerusalem.  A  man  clothed  in  linen, 
with  a  writer's  inkhorn,  sets  a  mark  on  the  forehead  of  the 
saints,  and  sends  destroying  angels  to  slay  the  rest.  The 
glory  of  Jehovah,  with  its  chariot  of  Cherubim,  as  in  i., 
appears  in  the  Temple ;  fire  from  it  is  scattered  over  the  city. 
The  glory  of  Jehovah  departs  from  the  Temple  and  the  city 
by  the  eastern  gate. 

Punishment  of  unjust  rulers. 

Restoration  and  purification  of  the  Jews  already  in  exile. 

The  captivity  symbolised  by  the  prophet's  removal  with  his 
goods,  by  his  taking  food  with  quaking. 

Assurance  that  these  threats  will  be  speedily  fulfilled. 

xiii..  Denunciation  of  prophets  and  prophetesses,  who,  un- 
commissioned by  Jehovah,  claim  to  speak  in  His  name,  saying 
"Peace,  where  there  is  no  peace,"  contradicting  Ezekiel's 
*  LXX.  (followed  by  many),  5th,  August. 


^^^EKIEL  217 

threats,  and  supporting  the  people  with  false  hopes,  as  they 
might  daub  a  wall  with  untempered  mortar. 

xiv.  I -I  I,  Rebuke  of  those  who  consult  the  prophet,  while 
they  "  take  idols  unto  their  heart." 

xiv.  12-23,  A  guilty  land  should  not  be  saved  because 
Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job  dwelt  within  it ;  much  less  Jerusalem, 
where  only  the  dregs  of  the  people  are  left. 

XV.,  Jerusalem,  always  a  worthless  vine,  now  half  burnt,  is  to 
be  burnt  altogether. 

xvi.,  Jerusalem's  persistent  sin  and  certain  doom  described 
under  the  figure  of  a  foundling,  taken  to  wife  by  Jehovah ;  she 
proved  faithless  and  was  punished. 

xvii.,  Zedekiah,  the  vine  grown  from  a  shoot  of  a  cedar,  the 
Davidic  dynasty,  planted  by  an  eagle,  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  to  be 
carried  captive,  because  he  broke  his  oath  of  allegiance  to 
Babylon,  and  revolted  to  another  eagle,  the  king  of  Egypt. 
But  Jehovah  will  plant  another  shoot  of  the  cedar,  which  will 
itself  become  a  great  cedar. 

xviii..  The  Doctrine  of  Retribution.  No  one  will  suffer  for 
the  sins  of  his  father,  but  will  be  punished  for  his  own  sins. 
The  penitent  sinner  shall  live,  the  backsliding  saint  shall 
die. 

xix..  Dirge  for  Judah  and  her  princes,  Jehoahaz  and  Jehoia- 
chin,  under  of  the  figures  of  a  lioness  and  her  whelps,  and  a 
vine  and  its  branches. 

XX.  1-44  (Seventh  year,  fifth  month,  tenth  day,  August, 
590),  In  Egypt,  in  the  Wilderness,  in  the  Holy  Land,  Jehovah 
spared  Israel  in  spite  of  its  utter  wickedness,  "  for  His  Name's 
sake,  that  It  should  not  be  profaned  in  the  sight  of  the 
nations."  For  the  same  reason,  though  the  Jews  are  still 
given  over  to  sin,  He  will  chasten,  purify,  and  restore  them. 

XX.  45-xxi.  17,  Ruin  of  Jerusalem  and  the  Holy  Land  under 
the  figures  of  a  conflagration  and  a  sword. 

xxi.  18-27,  SymboHc  narrative  setting  forth  imminent  ruin 
of  Jerusalem  ;  the  king  of  Babylon,  marching  towards  Pales- 
tine, casts  lots  as  to  whether  he  shall  attack  Jerusalem  or 
Rabbath  Ammon;  the  lot  falls  on  Jerusalem. 


2i8  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

xxi.  28-32,  The  doom  of  Ammon. 

Probably  a  later  passage,  placed  here,  and  not  amongst  the  Oracles  on 
the  Nations  because  of  the  previous  reference  to  Ammon.  The  "  sword  " 
here  is  sometimes  understood  as  that  of  Jehovah  *  and  sometimes  as  that 
of  Ammon.* 

xxii.,  The  total  depravity  of  the  people,  especially  the 
princes,  prophets,  and  priests. 

xxiii.,  The  alliances  of  Samaria  and  Jerusalem  with  foreign 
powers,  and  the  consequent  idolatry,  corruption,  and  ruin 
described  under  the  figure  of  the  career  of  two  sisters,  Oholah 
and  Oholibah,  whom  Jehovah  married,  but  they  were  faithless 
to  him,  with  many  lovers. 

Oholah  and  Oholibah  are  both  based  on  ^Ohe!,  tent ;  but  their  exact  sense 
is  doubtful.  They  are  sometimes  explained  as  contrasted;  Oholah  =  ^^rr 
tent,  having  a  (sacred)  tent  of  her  own,  i.e.,  self-chosen  and  illegitimate 
worship;  Oholibah  =  J/j/  (Jehovah's)  tent  is  in  her,  i.e.,  the  Temple,  as  the 
one  divinely  appointed  sanctuary.  But  the  chapter  suggests  no  contrast, 
and  it  is  better  to  take  the  names  as  synonymous;  Oholah  =  tent;  Oholi- 
bah =tent-in-her';  both  referring  to  the  high  places  and  their  corrupt 
worship. 

xxiv.  1-14  (Ninth  year,  tenth  month,  tenth  day;  beginning 
of  final  siege  of  Jerusalem,  January,  587),  Jerusalem  besieged, 
figured  as  a  rusted  caldron,  full  of  meat,  boiling  on  the  fire. 

xxiv.  15-27,  Ezekiel's  wife  dies;  he  is  forbidden  to  mourn 
aloud,  as  a  sign  that  the  Jews  will  be  dumb  with  anguish  when 
they  learn  the  fate  of  Jerusalem. 

XXV. -XXXII.,  Oracles  against  Foreign  Nations. 

xxv.,  Ammon,  Moab,  Edom,  and  the  Philistines. 

xxvi.-xxviii.  19,  Tyre.  Tyre  destroyed  by  Nebuchadrezzar; 
the  princes  of  the  sea,  with  whom  she  has  traded,  lament  over 
her;  her  wealth  and  ruin  figured  by  the  wreck  of  a  great 
merchant  ship ;  the  pride  of  the  Prince  of  Tyre  in  wisdom  and 
commerce ;  he  was  "  wiser  than  Daniel,"  "  the  anointed 
cherub  ...  in  Eden,  the  garden  of  God  .  .  .  and  upon  the 
holy  mountain  of  God  "  ;  yet  he  perishes  miserably. 

xxvii.  9b-25a  is  apparently  an  interpolation  ;  it  interrupts  the  context  ; 
the  rest  of  the  chapter  describes  a  ship.  These  verses  describe  the  trading 
city  and  its  customers  ;  so  Bertholet. 

xxviii.  20-23,  Zidon. 

1  Bertholet.  '  Davidson,  Skinner,  etc. 

*  The  i  being  an  old  construct  ending. 


EZEKIEL  219 

xxviii.  24-26,  Israel,  restored  and  delivered  from  neigh- 
bours, who  are  "pricking  briers"  and  "grieving  thorns,"  shall 
dwell  securely. 

These  verses  would  naturally  conclude  the  section  on  foreign  nations  ; 
they  may  have  stood  originally  after  xxxii.  ;  or  xxv. -xxviii.  dealing  with 
more  immediate  neighbours  formed  a  separate  section. 

xxix. -xxxii.,  Egypt. 

xxix.  I- 1 6  (Tenth  year,  tenth  month,  twelfth  day,  January, 
586),  Pharaoh,  the  proud  river  dragon,  destroyed;  Egypt, 
desolate  forty  years,  is  afterwards  restored  as  "the  basest  of 
the  kingdoms." 

xxix.  1 7-20  (Seven-and-twentieth  year,  first  month,  first  day. 
April,  570),  Note  to  the  previous  prophecy,  added  by  Ezekiel, 
Nebuchadrezzar  is  to  be  compensated  for  his  unsuccessful 
thirteen  years'  siege  of  Tyre  by  the  conquest  of  Egypt. 

xxix.  21,  The  revival  of  Israel. 

This  verse  may  be  the  conclusion  of  xxix.  1-16,  or  of  17-20 ;  in  the 
latter  case  it  gives  the  last  words  of  the  prophet. 

XXX.  1-19,  and  20-26  (Eleventh  year,  first  month,  seventh  day, 
April,  586),  Egypt  to  be  conquered,  its  cities  sacked,  its  king 
overthrown,  and  the  people  carried  captive  by  Nebuchadrezzar. 

xxxi.  (Eleventh  year,  third  month,  first  day,  June,  586),  The 
overthrow  of  Pharaoh  under  the  figure  of  the  cutting  down  of 
a  great  cedar. 

Instead  of  "  the  Assyrian  was  a  cedar  "  in  verse  3,  Asshur  *erez,  read 
"  Te^  asshur y^  a  rare  name  for  a  species  of  cedar  ;  'erez^  cedar,  is  a  gloss.  ^ 

xxxii.  1-16  (Twelfth  2  year,  twelfth  month,  first  day,  March, 
584).     The  nations  lament  over  the  ruin  of  Egypt. 

17-32  (Twelfth  year,  twelfth  month,^  fifteenth  day,  March, 
584),  Dirge  over  Pharaoh  and  his  army,  who  descend  into 
Sheol  to  join  Asshur  and  the  other  oppressors  of  Israel. 

Chapters  xxix. -xxxii.  were  uttered  either  during  or  soon  after  the  siege 
of  Jerusalem,  588-5S6,  when  the  party  opposed  to  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel 
hoped  that  the  intervention  of  Egypt  would  avert  the  doom  which  those 
prophets  had  pronounced  against  J udah. 

^  Cf.  Davidson,  and  Skinner. 

'  Syr.,  LXX.  A.,  eleventh,  March,  585. 

'  The  month  is  not  given  in  the  Hebrew  Text,  perhaps  because  this 
prophecy  was  given  in  the  same  month  as  the  preceding.  LXX.  adds 
"in  the  first  month,"  in  which  case  the  chronological  order  requires  us  to 
accept  the  reading  "eleventh  year"  in  verse  i. 


220  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

XXXIII.-XXXIX.,  Prophecies  of  Restoration. 

(After  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem.) 
xxxiii.  1-9,  The  prophet  as  watchman. 
Parallel  toiii.  16-21. 

xxxiii.  10-20,  The  penitent  sinner  shall  be  saved,  and  the 
backsliding  saint  shall  perish. 
Parallel  to  xviii. 

xxxiii.  21-33  (Eleventh  1  year,  tenth  month,  fifth  day, 
January,  585),  Ezekiel  hears  of  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem.  The 
remnant  in  Judah  denounced  for  immorality,  the  exiles  be- 
cause they  enjoy  hearing  Ezekiel,  but  do  not  act  according  to 
his  message. 

xxxiv.,  Former  rulers  have  been  evil  shepherds,  now 
Jehovah  will  shepherd  His  people,  and  give  them  for  a 
shepherd  His  servant  David,  i.e.,  a  prince  of  the  Davidic 
dynasty. 

xxxv.,  xxxvi.,  Edom  and  other  intruders  into  the  Holy  Land 
shall  be  driven  out ;  and,  for  His  name's  sake,  Jehovah  will 
restore  His  people,  and  make  the  land  populous  and  fertile. 
The  people  shall  receive  a  new  heart  and  a  new  spirit. 

xxxvii.  1-14,  The  revival  of  the  people  under  the  figure  of 
the  resurrection  of  an  army  of  dry  bones. 

xxxvii.  15-28,  The  reunion  of  Judah  and  Ephraim  under 
"  David  my  servant." 

xxxviii.  i-xxxix.  24,  The  prince  of  Rosh,  Meshech  and 
Tubal,  namely,  Gog  of  the  land  of  Magog,  is  moved,  in  the 
distant  future,  to  lead  the  far-off  nations  against  restored 
Israel.  He  and  his  hordes  are  annihilated,  and  the  name  of 
Jehovah  finally  vindicated  before  all  nations. 

Gog,  Magog,  Rosh,  Meshech,  and  Tubal  are  alike  unknown ;  cf.  Gen.  x.  2. 

xxxix.  25-29,  Brief  summary  of  the  promises  of  restoration, 

by  way  of  conclusion  to  this  group  of   prophecies,  ending, 

"  Neither  will  I  hide  my  face  any  more  from  them,  for  I  have 

poured  out  my  spirit  upon  the  house  of  Israel,  saith  the  Lord 

Jehovah." 

^  So  Syr.  and  some  Hebrew  MSS.,  leaving  six  months  for  the  news 
to  reach  Babylonia;  the  ordinary  Hebrew  Text  has  "twelfth,"  leaving 
eighteen  months,  which  is  too  long. 


EZEKIEL  221 

XL.-XLVIII.,  The  Constitution  of  Restored  Israel. 

xl.-xliii.  12  (xl.  T,  Five-and-twentieth  year,  beginning  of 
the  year,  tenth  day,  April,  572),  The  Temple.  The  glory 
of  God,  described  in  chapter  i.,  re-enters  by  the  east  gate,  by 
which  it  departed.^ 

xliii.  13-27,  The  Altar. 

xliv..  The  ministers  of  the  Temple.  The  Levites  who  had 
been  priests  of  the  high  places  are  degraded  to  the  inferior 
position  of  temple-servants,  and  the  priesthood  is  confined  to 
the  sons  of  Zadok,  the  Levites  of  the  Temple. 

xlv.  1-8,  The  lands  of  the  Priests,  Levites,  and  Prince. 

xlv.  9-xlvi.  24,  The  sacrifices,  for  which  the  Prince  provides 
out  of  his  revenue. 

xlvii.  I-I2,  A  river  from  the  Temple  makes  all  the  land 
fertile,  except  the  marshes  left  to  provide  salt. 

xlvii.  13-xlviii.  35,  The  extent  of  the  Holy  Land — 
Palestine,  west  of  Jordan — and  its  division  between  the 
twelve  tribes,  the  Priests,  the  Levites,  and  the  Prince.  The 
twelve  gates  of  the  city  named  after  the  twelve  tribes. 

(d)  Significance  of  the  Book  of  Ezekiel. — Ezekiel  represents 
a  transition  and  a  compromise ;  the  transition  from  the  ancient 
Israel  of  the  Monarchy  to  Judaism;  and  the  compromise 
between  the  ethical  teaching  of  the  prophets  and  the  popular 
need  for  ritual.  When  Ezekiel  left  his  native  land,  he  was 
old  enough  to  carry  with  him  the  memory  of  the  old  order 
and  its  traditions;  he  was  young  enough  to  adapt  himself 
to  the  conditions  of  the  new  order,  which  was  to  be  so 
powerfully  influenced  by  his  ministry.  He  also  marks  the 
transition  from  the  prophet  to  the  scribe  or  theologian;  he 
not  only  announces  the  Divine  Revelation,  but  also  discusses 
the  relations  of  its  various  truths.  Moreover  in  this  book 
we  see  prophetic  utterance  passing  into  literary  composition. 
The  older  prophets  were  first  of  all  preachers,  their  books 
are  merely  records  of  their  preaching,  often  collected  and 
arranged  by  others.  But,  although  Ezekiel  also  was  a 
preacher,  and  his  book  represents  his  utterances,  yet  it  is 
*  X.  18-22. 


222  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

a  careful  piece  of  literary  work,  and  much  of  it,  especially 
xl.-xlviii.,  was  originally  composed  in  writing. 

Chapters  xliii.  i8-xlv.  8  are  a  connecting  link  between 
Deuteronomy  and  the  Priestly  Code.  Deuteronomy  speaks 
of  "  the  priests,  the  Levites,"  and  Deuteronomy  xviii.  provides 
that,  since  the  high  places  are  to  be  suppressed,  the  Levites 
who  had  been  priests  of  the  high  places  may  come  to 
Jerusalem  and  share  the  functions  and  revenues  of  the 
Temple  priesthood.  Ezekiel  directs  that  the  Levites  of 
the  high  places  shall  be  degraded  into  an  inferior  order 
subordinate  to  the  priesthood,  which  is  confined  to  the 
Levites  of  the  house  of  Zadok,  />.,  the  Jerusalem  priest- 
hood, afterwards  styled  "  Sons  of  Aaron."  i  This  is  the  basis 
of  the  sharp  distinction  in  the  Priestly  Code  between  the 
priests,  or  "sons  of  Aaron,"  and  the  Levites. 

The  period  of  transition  lent  itself  to  compromise.  The 
earlier  prophets  laid  almost  exclusive  stress  on  the  moral 
and  spiritual  life,  and  emphatically  condemned  formal  and 
superstitious  worship,  virtually  disparaging  all  ritual.  Yet 
fixed  religious  observances  were  still  necessary  for  the  people. 
In  Deuteronomy  the  teaching  of  the  prophets  is  combined 
with  reforms  in  ritual.  But  this  initial  compromise  was 
inadequate  and  indefinite,  and  the  combination  of  the 
moral  and  spiritual  teaching  of  i.-xxxix.  with  the  ritual 
system  of  xl.-xlviii.  was  the  formal  recognition  that  Judaism 
was  to  be  based  on  the  ritual  tradition  as  well  as  on  the 
revelation  made  to  the  pre-exilic  prophets. 

(e)  The  Teaching  of  Ezekiel. — In  matters  of  doctrine, 
Ezekiel  chiefly  expresses  more  clearly  and  formally  the 
teaching  of  his  predecessors.  "While  the  substance  of 
these  chapters  [i.-xxxix.]  presents  no  single  element  which 
may  not  be  traced  in  the  writings  of  earlier  prophets,  there 
is  none  which  does  not  receive  a  more  distinct  intellectual 
expression  in  the  hands  of  Ezekiel."  ^  The  denunciation 
of   foreign    alliances,    the   doom   of   Israel   and   Judah   on 

*  Perhaps  including  others  besides  Zadokites. 

'^  Skinner,  art.  "Ezekiel,"  Dr.  Hastings'  Bible  Dictionary. 


EZEKIEL  223 

account  of  the  vice  and  cruelty  of  the  governing  classes, 
the  future  restoration,  and  the  Messiah  as  a  Davidic  prince, 
are  all  part  of  the  message  of  earlier  prophets. 

But  Ezekiel  is  chiefly  dependent  on  Jeremiah.  Both  were 
able  to  look  forward  from  the  punishment  inflicted  upon  the 
Jews  by  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  to  the  new  life  of  the  Restora- 
tion, of  which  they  write  more  fully  and  definitely  than 
their  predecessors.  Ezekiel  endorses  Jeremiah's  wholesale 
condemnation  of  the  prophets,  priests,  and  princes  of  their 
time.  Ezekiel,  too,  utters  no  condemnation  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar and  Babylon.  Moreover  the  younger  prophet  further 
develops  Jeremiah's  teaching  on  individual  religion ;  his 
prophetic  ministry  is  partly  pastoral,  he  is  a  watchman  for 
every  single  soul.^  In  the  famous  eighteenth  chapter  he 
traverses  the  primitive  theological  appHcation  of  heredity, 
and  declares  that  a  man  is  not  punished  for  his  father's 
sin ;  that  each  is  judged,  not  only  according  to  his  own 
doings,  but  according  to  his  moral  condition  at  the  time 
of  judgment.  His  teaching  as  to  a  new  heart  and  a  new 
spirit  2  is  an  echo  of  Jeremiah's  New  Covenant. 

The  more  characteristic  features  of  Ezekiel's  teaching  are : — 

(i.)  The  Divine  Transcendence ;  Jehovah  touches  Jeremiah's 
mouth,  but  Ezekiel  multiplies  elaborate  symbols  to  suggest  his 
vision  not  of  Jehovah,  but  of  the  glory  of  God. 

(ii.)  Jehovah  restores  the  Jews  "for  His  name's  sake," 
because  His  reputation  is  bound  up  in  the  eyes  of  the 
world  with  their  prosperity.  Israel  has  no  claim  but  the 
divine  election ;  the  people  has  been  evil  from  the  beginning.^ 

(iii.)  Chapters  xxxviii.,  xxxix.,  with  their  picture  of  the 
heathen  armies  under  Gog  gathered  together  to  perish  in 
an  attack  on  Jerusalem,  probably  suggested  the  similar 
apocalyptic  visions  in  Joel  and  the  Appendix  to  Zechariah.'* 

(iv.)  The  ordinances  of  xl.-xlviii.  involve  the  principle  of 
graduated   sanctity  of  religious  persons,  places,  things,  and 

^  iii.  16-21,  xxxiii.  1-9.  "^  xi.  19.  ^  xxiii. 

*  The  germ  of  the  idea  is  perhaps  found  in  Zeph.  iii.  8. 


224  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

times,  afterwards  developed  and  systematised  in  the  Priestly 
Code. 

(f)  The  Relatiofi  of  xl.-xlviii.  to  the  Law  of  Holiness^  see 
chapter  ii.  §  19. 

(g)  Cano7iicity. — It  is  stated  that,  on  account  of  the  marked 
differences  between  many  ordinances  in  Ezekiel  and  the 
corresponding  laws  in  the  Pentateuch,  there  was  some  ques- 
tion of  excluding  Ezekiel  from  the  Jewish  Scriptures ;  but,  at 
the  beginning  of  the  Christian  Era,  Hananiah  ben  Hezekiah 
shut  himself  up  with  300  measures  of  lamp-oil,  and  reconciled 
them. 

(h)  Use  in  the  New  Testament. — Much  of  the  imagery  of 
the  Apocalypse  is  derived  from  this  book;  also,  possibly, 
the  description  of  Christ  as  the  Good  Shepherd^;  other- 
wise the  traces  of  this  book  in  N.T.  are  very  few  and  slight. 

10.  DanieL 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship — It  is  not  clear  that  the  author  in- 
tended this  book  to  be  received  as  the  work  of  Daniel  himself. 
The  narratives  are  in  the  third  person,  and  each  of  the  two 
halves  of  the  apocalyptic  section  is  introduced  by  a  verse  in 
the  third  person.^  Nor  does  the  constant  use  of  "  I,  Daniel," 
in  this  section,  necessarily  involve  a  claim  that  the  rest  of 
chapters  vii.-xii:  was  actually  written  by  Daniel.  The  literary 
method  which  secures  dramatic  effect  by  speaking  in  the  name 
of  some  well-known  character,  has  always  been  familiar.  It  is 
used  in  Ecclesiastes,  where  the  author  speaks  in  the  character 
of  Solomon,  "I,  the  Preacher,  was  king  over  Israel  in  Jeru- 
salem "  ^ ;  and  it  is  the  conventional  form  of  apocalyptic  litera- 
ture. We  have  no  clear  evidence  as  to  whether  the  convention 
was  generally  understood  by  the  author's  contemporaries. 

The  general  character  of  an  apocalypse  is  that  the  author 
places  in  the  mouth  of  some  ancient  worthy  a  history  of 
events  up  to  the  author's  own  time,  followed  by  a  description 
of  God's  judgment  on  the  wicked  and  deliverance  of   His 

1  Cf.  xxxiv.  with  John  x.  16,  Hebrews  xiii,  20,  i.  Peter  ii.  25. 
*  vii.  I.  X.  I.  '  i.  13. 


DANIEL  225 

people.  In  Daniel  vii.-xii.  we  have  four  historical  sketches, 
each  of  which  ends  with  the  persecution  of  the  Jews  by 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  His  ruin  and  death,  which  are  an- 
nounced in  general  terms,  seem  to  be  still  future.  The  last 
and  fullest  sketch  of  the  history^  is  followed  by  an  account 
of  the  resurrection  and  judgment.  Similarly,  but  with  less 
details,  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  of  the  Great  Image  an- 
nounces the  establishment  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  as  the 
immediate  sequel  to  the  Greek  dominion  in  Egypt  and  Syria.^ 

In  view  of  these  facts,  the  book  is  commonly  dated 
between  the  desecration  of  the  Temple,  i68,  and  the  death  of 
Antiochus,  164.  If  we  deduce  from  viii.  14,  "The  sanctuary 
shall  be  cleansed,"^  that  the  reconsecration  of  the  Temple  in 
165  had  already  taken  place,  we  are  shut  up  to  the  close  of 
165  or  the  beginning  of  164.* 

This  conclusion  is  confirmed  by  a  wealth  of  evidence, 
external  and  internal.  While  there  is  no  trace  of  the  existence 
of  the  book  before  1 68,  its  influence  from  that  time  onward  is 
very  marked.  Thus  there  is  no  mention  of  Daniel  in  the 
great  list  of  Jewish  worthies,  Ecclesiasticus  xliv.-l.,  c.  200, 
which,  moreover,  says  "Neither  was  there  a  man  born  like 
unto  Joseph"^;  though  as  a  Jew  in  high  office  at  a  foreign 
court,  and  as  an  interpreter  of  dreams,  Daniel  was  very  Hke 
Joseph.  On  the  other  hand  a  section  of  the  Sibylline  verses, 
dated  about  B.C.  140,  refers  to  the  "ten  horns," ^  and 
i.  Maccabees,  c.  B.C.  100,  refers  to  the  Fiery  Furnace  and 
the  Den  of  Lions. 

In  the  Hebrew  Canon,  Daniel  is  not  placed  among  the 
Prophets,  but  in  the  Hagiographa,  the  latest  section  of  the 
Canon;  although  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi,  who  were 
later  than  the  time  at  which  Daniel  is  described  as  living,  are 
placed  among  the  prophets.     Either  the  Jews  did  not  regard 

^  x.-xii.  ^  ii.  44. 

'  Wem'fdag  qddhesh,  R.V.  Mg. ,  justified.  Bevan  thinks  that  the  vague- 
ness of  this  prediction  shows  that  the  event  had  not  yet  taken  place. 

*  CoRNiLL,  Kautzsch,  Konig,  Strack,  after  168 ;  Driver,  168  or 
167.  °  xlix.  15. 

•  Bevan,  cf.  vii.  7,  20,  24,  with  Sibyllines  III.,  388  ff. 


226  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

the  book  as  prophetical,  or  it  was  considerably  later  than 
Malachi,  c.  444. 

The  language  also  points  to  a  late  date.  For  the  most  part 
the  Hebrew  is  fairly  correct;  the  author,  doubtless,  was  a 
scholar,  who  wrote  in  a  classical  style.  But  here  and  there 
he  betrays  himself  by  using  the  vocabulary  of  Chronicles,  or 
of  post-biblical  Hebrew. ^  The  appearance  of  Greek  words, 
especially  the  late  Greek  crvfiffxavLa,^  E.V.  dulcimer,  points 
to  the  Greek  period  rather  than  to  the  Exile.  The  recently- 
discovered  fragments  of  the  original  Hebrew  of  Ecclesiasticus 
show  that  a  very  fair  imitation  of  classical  Hebrew  was  written 
in  the  Greek  period. 

The  author  shows  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  times 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  but  makes  serious  mistakes  about 
Nebuchadnezzar  and  the  Fall  of  Babylon,  and  the  early 
Persian  Empire.  Belshazzar  was  neither  the  son,  nor  of 
the  family  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  "  He  had  disappeared  from 
history  when  Cyrus  entered  Babylonia  .  .  .  Cyrus  entered 
Babylon  in  peace  .  .  .  and  the  Babylonian  king  was  not 
slain."  "'Darius  the  Mede'  is  a  reflection  into  the  past  of 
Darius,  the  son  of  Hystaspes,"  i.e.y  history  not  only  tells  us 
nothing  of  any  "  Darius  the  Mede,"  but  his  existence  in  the 
position  assigned  to  him  by  our  book  is  entirely  inconsistent 
with  what  history  does  tell  us  of  that  period.  On  these  and 
other  grounds  Professor  Sayce  concludes  that  "The  story 
of  Belshazzar's  Fall  is  not  historical  in  the  modern  sense 
of  the  word  history,"  and  that  "The  name  of  Darius  and 
the  story  of  the  slaughter  of  the  Chaldaean  king  go  together. "^ 

The  statement  of  Josephus'*  that  the  High  Priest  Jaddua 
presented  the  Book  of  Daniel  to  Alexander  the  Great  is  from 
the  narrative  of  Alexander's  visit  to  Jerusalem,  which  is 
generally  regarded  as  untrustworthy. 

The  date  of  the  LXX.  is  too  uncertain  to  be  used  as  an 

argument  for  the  early  existence  of  our  book. 

1  Bevan,  28  ff. 

»  iii.  4  sumponyS,  R.V.  Mg.  bagpipe, 

^  The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  Monuments ^  1894,  pp.  524-531, 

*  Antt.  xi.,  8,  5. 


DANIEL  227 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — At  the  close  of  the  Greek 
period,  Judaea  was  a  province  of  the  Seleucid  kingdom  of 
Syria.  Antiochus  IV.  Epiphanes,  175-164,  tried  to  hellenise 
the  Jews,  and  met  with  some  success.^  In  175  he  deposed 
the  High  Priest  Onias  III.,^  and  replaced  him  by  his  hellenis- 
ing  brother  Jason.  In  168  Antiochus  set  on  foot  a  fierce 
persecution  to  induce  the  Jews  to  relinquish  circumcision  and 
the  observance  of  the  Sabbath.  He  attempted  to  destroy  all 
copies  of  the  Law.^  In  this  persecution  many  Jews  suffered 
martyrdom,  with  great  heroism.  At  his  command  there  was 
set  up  on  the  altar  of  burnt  offering  at. the  Temple,  "the 
abomination  of  desolation  "* — a  heathen  altar  or  idol.  In 
167  began  the  revolt  of  the  Maccabees,  in  166  Judas  Macca- 
baeus  occupied  Jerusalem,  and  in  165  reconsecrated  the 
Temple  about  three  years  ^  after  its  pollution.  In  164, 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  died,  leaving  Judas  still  in  possession 
of  Jerusalem. 

(c)  Daniel. — Probably  the  narratives  in  i.-vi.  are  based  on 
some  older  work  or  on  popular  tradition,  no  trace  of  which, 
however,  is  found  except  in  Ezekiel  xiv.  14,  20,  where  Daniel 
is  coupled  with  Noah  and  Job,  and  in  Ezekiel  xxviii.  3,  where 
he  is  referred  to  as  a  typical  wise  man;  "  Behold,"  says  Ezekiel 
to  the  prince  of  Tyre,  "  thou  art  wiser  than  Daniel."  Apparently 
the  prophet  is  referring  to  some  ancient  Israelite  sage.  As  he 
wrote  these  verses  shortly  before  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  586, 
and  Daniel  did  not  begin  his  public  career  till  the  second  year 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  c.  603,  the  story  of  Daniel  as  known  to 
Ezekiel  must  have  been  entirely  different  from  that  told  in  our 
book.  According  to  i.  4  Daniel  was  a  youth  at  the  time  ^ ;  he 
is  also  represented  as  surviving  the  Fall  of  Babylon,  536,  so 
that  in  586  he  can  scarcely  have  been  more  than  thirty-six.'' 

1  xi.  32.  '  ix.  26.  ^  Cf.vu,  2$,  ix.  26,  27,  xi.  28-32. 

*  i.  Mace.  i.  54,  Daniel  xi.  31,  xii.  11.  '  vii.  25,  etc. 

®  The  notes  of  time  in  chapters  i.  and  ii.  are  difficult  to  reconcile  with 
each  other,  but  the  events  in  chapter  ii.  must  be  understood  as  happening 
not  more  than  a  year  after  those  of  chapter  i. 

^  Rev.  J.  E,  H.  Thomson,  author  of  the  Pulpit  Commentary  Daniel, 
has  furnished  me  with  a  curious  parallel  to  the  supposed  mention  by 


228  BIBLICAL    INTRODUCTION 

(d)  Language. — The  section  ii.  4-vii.  28  is  in  Aramaic. 
The  comparison  of  this  section  with  the  rest  of  the  book 
does  not  suggest  any  satisfactory  reason  why  part  should 
have  been  written  in  Hebrew  and  part  in  Aramaic.  Why, 
for  instance,  should  the  Chaldsean  king  speak  to  the  Chaldaeans 
in  Hebrew  in  ii.  3,  be  answered  by  them  in  Aramaic  in 
ii.  4b,  and  the  rest  of  the  narratives,  conversations  included, 
be  given  in  Aramaic?  Why,  again,  should  the  vision  in  vii., 
in  the  first  year  of  Belshazzar,  be  in  Aramaic,  and  the  very 
similar  vision  in  viii.,  in  the  same  king's  third  year,  be  in 
Hebrew?  The  variety  of  language  certainly  does  not  dis- 
tinguish parts  intended  for  the  learned  from  those  addressed 
to  the  common  people,  nor  is  it  arranged  according  to  the 
nationality  of  speakers  or  hearers.  The  least  difficult  ex- 
planation is  that  of  Lenormant,  adopted  by  Bevan.^  It  is 
suggested  that  part  of  the  Hebrew  of  Daniel  was  lost,  and 
the  gap  was  filled  up  from  an  Aramaic  translation  or  Targum. 
That  the  Aramaic  section  concludes  with  the  end  of  a 
division  of  the  book,  raises  no  difficulty;  but  it  cannot  be 
a  mere  accident  that  the  Aramaic  section  begins  immediately 
after  the  statement,  "  Then  spake  the  Chaldaeans  to  the  king 
in  Aramaic."  Perhaps  the  editor  who  used  an  Aramaic 
document  to  supply  the  gap  in  the  Hebrew  did  not  simply 
fill  in  just  what  was  wanting  in  the  Hebrew,  but  sacrificed 
a  portion  of  the  Hebrew  to  avoid  an  abrupt  and  unexplained 
transition  from  Hebrew  to  Aramaic ;  ii.  4a  was  the  latest  point 
in  the  Hebrew  at  which  Aramaic  could  be  introduced  for  the 
first  time  with  any  apparent  fitness. 

The  book  must  have  assumed  its  bi-lingual  form  at  a  very 

Ezekiel  of  a  contemporary  in  the  same  breath  with  ancient  worthies. 
At  family  worship,  the  night  after  the  Disruption,  Dr.  Hamilton,  of 
London,  read  Hebrews  xi.,  and,  in  concluding,  added  to  the  list  of  the 
Scriptural  heroes  the  names  of  the  leading  Disruption  worthies.  At 
the  utmost,  however,  such  parallels  only  show  that  it  is  possible  that 
Ezekiel  was  speaking  of  a  young  contemporary,  not  that  it  is  probable. 

Persons  of  the  name  Daniel  are  also  mentioned  in  i.  Chron.  iii.  i, 
a  son  of  David,  by  the  wise  woman  Abigail,  Ezra  viii.  2,  Neh.  x.  6, 
they  can  have  nothing  to  do  either  with  Ezekiel's  Daniel,  or  the  subject  of 
our  book.  ^  Page  27. 


DANIEL  229 

early  date,  since  the  LXX.  was  clearly  translated  from  a 
MS.  in  which  ii.  4-vii.  28  was  in  Aramaic  and  the  rest  in 
Hebrew.  1 

(e)  The  Greek  Daniel — Both  in  the  LXX.  and  in  Theodo- 
tion,  c.  A.D.  180,  the  book  is  expanded  by  the  insertion  of 
the  Prayer  of  Azariah  and  the  Song  of  the  Three  Children, 
and  by  the  addition  of  the  narratives  of  Susanna,  and  of  Bel 
and  the  Dragon,  of  which  Daniel  is  the  hero.^ 

In  the  Greek  Bible  of  the  Christian  Church,^  Theodotion's 
translation  displaced  that  of  the  Seventy. 

(f)  Contents. 

I.-VI.,  Narratives  in  the  Third  Person. 

Daniel  and  his  companions  fed  on  pulse.  Nebuchadnezzar's 
dream  of  the  Great  Image.  The  Fiery  Furnace.  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's dream  of  the  Great  Tree  hewn  down,  foreshowing 
his  madness.  Belshazzar's  Feast.  Daniel  in  the  Den  of 
Lions. 

VII.-XII.,  Visions  in  the  First  Person.* 

vii.,^    The    Four    Beasts,   /.<?.,    the    Babylonian,    Median, 

Persian,   and   Greek   Empires.      The    fourth   beast  has   ten 

horns,  />.,  ten  successive  kings.     A  little  horn,  i.e.^  Antiochus 

Epiphanes,  comes  up,  before  which  three  of  the  ten  horns, 

/>.,  three  of  his  predecessors  or  rivals,  are  plucked  up.     The 

little  horn  persecutes  the  saints,  i.e.^  the  persecutions  of  the 

Maccabsean  period.     The  "Ancient  of  Days "  destroys  the 

Fourth  Beast  and  takes  away  the  power  of  the  other  three,  and 

gives  dominion  over  the  earth  to  a  Man,  i.e.^  Israel. 

"One  like  unto  a  Son  of  Man,"  ?.«.,  human  in  contrast  to  the  beasts 
which  symbolise  the  Gentile  Empires.  Cf.  the  use  of  "Servant  of 
Jehovah"  for  Israel  in  Isaiah  xliv.  21,  etc.  The  "One  like  unto  a 
Son  of  Man,"  to  whom  dominion  is  given  in  14,  must  equal  "the 
people  of  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,"  to  whom  dominion  is  given 
m  27,  in  the  explanation  of  the  vision.  This  view  is  quite  consistent 
with  the  use  of  "Son  of  Man"  in  N.T.  for  Christ;  N.T.  regularly 
applies  to  Christ  what  is  said  of  Israel  in  O.T.,  e.g..  Matt.  ii.  15  and 
Hosea  xi.  i.  The  view,  however,  that  our  phrase  refers  to  a  personal 
Messiah,  has  been  accepted  by  Ewald.^ 

^  Bevan,  28.  '  Cf.  chap,  vii.,  §  5.  '  e.g.,  in  AB. 

*  In  vii.  I,  X.  I,  introductory  verses,  Daniel  is  spoken  of  in  the  third 
person,  ^  Cf,  the  Dream  in  ii.  ^  Ap.  Bevan,  118. 


230  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

viii.,  The  Ram  and  the  He-Goat.  A  Ram  with  two  horns, 
the  Medo-Persian  Empire  ^  is  overthrown  by  the  Greeks  under 
Alexander. 2  The  horn  of  the  He-Goat  is  replaced  by  four 
horns,  the  kingdoms  of  Alexander's  successors.^  From  one 
of  the  four  horns,  />.,  Syria,  arises  a  little  horn,  />.,  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  who  sacks  the  Temple  and  stops  the  Daily 
Sacrifice.  The  desolation  of  the  Temple  to  last  2300  morn- 
ings and  evenings,  />.,  1150  days,  three  years,  and  a  fraction. 
The  explanation  is  given  by  the  Angel  Gabriel. 

ix..  After  confession  and  prayer  by  Daniel,  Gabriel  appears 
and  tells  him  that^  "From  the  going  forth  of  the  promise 
to  people  and  to  build  Jerusalem,"  i.e.,  the  promise  to 
Jeremiah  at  the  time  of  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,^  "until  an 
Anointed  One,  a  Prince,"^  i.e.,  either  until  Cyrus, '^  or  until 
there  is  again  a  High  Priest  actually  officiating^  "(there  are) 
seven  weeks,"  i.e.,  49  years,  about  the  time  of  the  captivity, 
"and  for  sixty  and  two  weeks  it  shall  be  peopled  and  built," 
and  after  the  sixty-two  weeks  "the  Anointed  One  shall  be 
cut  off  .  .  .  and  the  city  and  the  sanctuary  shall  go  to 
ruin,"  i.e.,  434  years  after  the  Return,  the  High  Priest  will 
be  slain  or  removed — the  reference  is  perhaps  to  Onias  III. 
deposed  early  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes — and 
the  city  and  Temple  sacked.  "The  covenant  shall  be 
annulled  for  the  many  during  one  week,"  ^  i.e.,  seven  years, 
perhaps  referring  to  the  unsettlement  and  laxity  preceding 
the  persecutions,  "and  during  half  a  week,"  i.e.,  three  years 
and  a  halfj^*^  "  sacrifice  and  oblation  shall  cease,  and  instead 
thereof  (there  shall  be)  abominations  set  up."  Afterwards  the 
desolator,  Antiochus,  is  to  be  destroyed. 

^  20.  *  21.  '  22. 

*  The  translation  quoted  here  is  Bevan's,  p.  161. 

^  Jer.  XXX.  18-22.  '  Mashiah  Nagldh. 

''  Isaiah  xlv.  I. 

8  Bleek,  etc.,  ap.  Driver,  Bevan. 

'  R.V.,  "He  shall  make  a  firm  covenant  with  many  for  one  week,'* 
perhaps  referring  to  Antiochus  and  the  Hellenising  party  among  the  Jews. 

^°  Cf.  the  three  years  and  a  fraction,  viii.  14,  and  the  "time,  times,  and 
half  a  time,"  xii.  7. 


DANIEL  231 

The  explanation  just  given  would  not  be  borne  out  by  an  exact 
chronology,  from  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  586,  to  the  reconsecration 
of  the  Temple  by  Judas  Maccabseus,  165,  is  only  about  421  years.  But 
such  absence  of  mathematical  accuracy  is  unimportant  in  an  apocalypse, 
where  numbers  are  not  determined  merely  by  arithmetic,  but  also  by 
symbolism  and  theology.  ^  Moreover,  an  exact  knowledge  of  chronology 
was  rare  and  difficult  for  the  ordinary  Jew,  and  there  is  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  the  author  of  this  book  was  an  expert  in  the  subject.  All 
attempts  to  find  in  these  figures  a  prediction  of  the  precise  date  of  the 
crucifixion  are  shipwrecked  on  similar  difficulties.  An  inaccuracy  which  is 
natural  and  harmless  in  a  symbolic  apocalypse,  would  be  fatal  to  a  predic- 
tion supposed  to  guarantee  Christianity  by  foretelling  the  exact  time  of  the 
death  of  Christ. 

Cf.  Bevan  and  J.  E.  H.  Thomson,  Daniel,  Pulpit  Commentary, 

x.-xii.,  An  abstract  of  the  history  of  the  East  from  the  time 
of  "  Darius  the  Mede,"  narrated  to  Daniel  by  "  One  like  the 
similitude  of  the  sons  of  men,"  in  the  interval  between  the 
narrator's  conflicts  with  the  prince,  or  guardian  angel  of 
Persia,  in  which  the  narrator  was  aided  by  Michael,  the 
guardian  angel  of  the  Jews.  No  names  of  persons  are  given, 
and  with  some  exceptions,  places  are  described  and  not 
named.  In  spite  of  the  obscurity  of  this  method,  and  the 
scantiness  of  information  as  to  the  East  in  this  period,  we 
are  able  to  recognise  in  xi.  a  tolerably  accurate  sketch  of  the 
history  of  the  Persian  and  Greek  empires  in  Egypt  and  Syria, 
between  c.  536  and  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  The 
latter  half  of  the  chapter,  or  more,  is  taken  up  with  a  more 
detailed  account  of  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
specially  dwelling  on  his  intrigues  with  Hellenising  Jews, 
and  his  profaning  the  sanctuary,  stopping  the  regular  burnt- 
offering,  and  setting  up  the  abomination  "that  maketh  deso- 
late." ^  The  account  of  his  doings  concludes  "  Tidings  from 
the  East  and  North  shall  trouble  him :  and  he  shall  go  forth 
with  great  fury  to  destroy  and  utterly  to  make  away  many. 
He  shall  plant  his  pavilions  between  the  sea  and  the  glorious 
holy  mountain"  —  definite  details,  followed  by  the  vague, 
general  statement — "yet  he  shall  come  to  his  end,  and  none 
shall  help  him."3 

^  The  490  years  are  probably  7  times  Jeremiah's  70  years. 
'  xi.  30  t  '  xi.  45. 


232  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

The  lapse  from  details  to  generalities  seems  to  show  that,  at  the  time  of 
writing,  the  death  of  Antiochus  had  not  yet  taken  place. 

As  we  know  no  events  towards  the  close  of  Antiochus'  reign  corres- 
ponding to  xi.  40-45a,  Bevan  thinks  they  are  a  prediction  of  what  the 
author  expected  to  happen.  But,  "at  the  time  of  the  end"  in  40,  is 
scarcely  sufficient  indication  of  the  transition  from  narrative  to  prediction. 
The  tenor  and  tone  of  40  fif.  is  just  the  same  as  that  of  the  preceding 
sections.  It  is  also  difficult  to  regard  it  as  a  resjwii  of  Antiochus'  reign, 
or  as  a  recurrence  to  the  events  of  168,  already  referred  to  in  29  ff.  The 
difficulty  may  arise  from  our  imperfect  knowledge  of  the  history,  or  from 
some  corruption  of  the  text,  e.g.^  40-45  may  have  been  originally  indepen- 
dent, parallel  to  and  not  a  sequel  of  the  preceding.  In  45,  Theodotion 
has,  "  He  shall  come  as  far  as  his  portion," ^  instead  of  "he  shall  come  to 
his  end." 

The  last  chapter  tells  how  Michael,  the  prince,  or  guardian 
angel  of  Israel,  delivers  the  people.  There  is  a  resurrection 
of  the  dead  to  rewards  and  punishments.  The  tribulation 
lasts  for  "  a  time,  times,  and  half  a  time,"  />.,  three  years  and 
a  half,  ot  1290  days,  also  about  three  years  and  a  half  from 
the  stopping  of  the  daily  sacrifice.  And  "  Blessed  is  he  that 
waiteth"  forty-five  days  longer,  "and  cometh  to  the  1335 
days."2 

(g)  Teaching. — The  characteristic  function  of  the  apocalypse 
is  to  state  the  divine  judgment  on  history,  to  trace  the  course 
of  events  as  the  working  out  of  God's  purposes  for  His  people, 
and  to  announce  the  vindication  of  God's  moral  government 
of  the  world  in  a  day  of  reward  and  retribution.  The 
narratives  must  have  served  to  steel  the  Jews  to  endure 
torture  and  death  for  their  faith.  The  part  played  by  angels 
is  similar  to  that  in  Zechariah,  but  here  two  angels,  Gabriel 
and  Michael,  are  named,^  and  there  are  "  princes  "  or  guardian 
angels  of  different  nations.*  Daniel  also  contains  the  most 
explicit  passage  ^  in  O.T.  as  to  a  resurrection ;  just  and  unjust 
alike  are  to  be  raised  from  the  dead,  the  one  to  be  re- 
warded, the  other  to  be  punished.     The  resurrection  is  partial, 

^  ^ws  /xipovs  avTov. 

*  Cf.  also  the  11 50  days  of  viii.  14 ;  the  reason  and  significance  of  the 
slight  differences  in  the  number  of  days  cannot  now  be  explained. 
'  viii.  16,  X.  13,  21,  xii.  I. 
^  Persia,  x.  13  ;  Greece,  x.  20;  the  Jews,  x.  21. 
^  xii.  2. 


DANIEL  233 

*'  many  .  .  .  shall  awake  " ;  perhaps  the  silence  as  to  Gentiles 
shows  that  the  author  is  only  thinking  of  the  Jews ;  the 
resurrection  is  to  an  eternal  life  in  the  kingdom  of  God 
on  earth.  Yet  these  limitations  are  more  apparent  than  real. 
There  are  points  in  O.T.  Revelation  where  Israel  almost 
becomes  a  term  for  regenerate  mankind,  and,  in  the  Messianic 
pictures  of  the  future  earth,  is  transformed  to  heaven. 

(h)  Use  in  the  New  Testament. — Much  of  the  imagery  of 
the  Apocalypse  is  borrowed  from  Daniel,  Perhaps  the  N.T. 
phrase,  "Son  of  Man,"  was  first  suggested  by  vii.  13,  though, 
on  the  one  hand,  the  phrase,  in  a  less  special  use,  is  common 
in  Ezekiel;  and,  on  the  other,  it  may  have  reached  the 
N.T.  through  the  Book  of  Enoch.  This  verse  is  alluded  to 
Mark  xiii.  26,  etc.,  and  in  Mark  xiii.  14  the  phrase  "abomina- 
tion of  desolation"^  is  applied  to  something  in  connection 
with  the  last  siege  of  Jerusalem.  The  description  of  the  Man 
of  Sin,  ii.  Thessalonians  ii.  4,  may  be  partly  suggested  by 
xi.  36.  In  Hebrews  xi.  33  f  Daniel  is  alluded  to  in  the  clause, 
"stopped  the  mouths  of  lions,"  and  the  Three  Children  in 
"quenched  the  power  of  fire." 

^  ix.  27. 


CHAPTER  VI. 
THE  BOOK  OF  THE  TWELVE  PROPHETS 


1.  Introductory. 

2.  Hosea. 
3-  Joel. 

4.  Amos. 

5.  Obadiah. 

6.  Jonah. 

7.  Micah. 


8.  Nahum. 

9.  Habakkuk. 

10.  Zephaniah. 

11.  Haggai. 

12.  Zechariah  i.-viiL 

13.  Zechariah  ix.-xiv. 

14.  Malachi. 


1.  Introductory. — These  books  are  usually  known  as  the 
"Minor  Prophets,"  because  they  are  shorter  than  the  pre- 
ceding; but  Ecclesiasticus,  Josephus,  and  some  of  the 
Rabbis  and  Fathers,  who  reckon  them  as  a  single  book, 
speak  of  them  as  "  the  Twelve  "  or  "  the  Twelve  Prophets," 
or  "the  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets," ^  and  the  use  of  the 
latter  title  has  been  revived  by  Professor  G.  A.  Smith.  The 
Jewish  custom  of  reckoning  the  number  of  O.T.  books  as 
twenty-two  or  twenty-four  implies  that  "the  Twelve"  were 
reckoned  as  a  single  work.  Probably  it  was  formed  in- 
dependently as  a  separate  collection,  completed  not  later 
than  B.C.  200 2;  and  passed  through  one  or  more  earlier 
editions,  Zech.  ix.-xiv.  and  Malachi  being  added  after  the 
rest  of  the  books  had  been  collected. 

The  LXX.  places  the  first  six  in  the  order :  Hosea,  Amos, 
Micah,  Joel,  Obadiah,  Jonah ;  the  last  six  in  the  same  order  as 
the  Hebrew.  Probably  the  order  represents  the  chronological 
theories  of  different  editors. 

2.  Hosea. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — Our  only  source  of  information 

*  On  account  of  Ecclesiasticus  xlix.   10 
234 


HOSEA  235 

is  the  book  itself.  According  to  i.  i,  Hosea  the  son  of  Beeri 
ministered  in  the  reigns  of  Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz,  and 
Hezekiah  of  Judah,  and  Jeroboam  II.  of  Israel,  i.e.^  between 
c.  778  and  c.  695,  and  between  c.  783  and  c.  743.  Internal 
evidence  approximately  confirms  this  statement.  Moreover, 
the  prosperity  of  Israel  is  no  longer  at  its  height,  as  in  Amos ; 
but  the  series  of  disasters  which  culminated  in  the  Fall  of 
Samaria  have  begun.  Hence  Hosea  is  somewhat  later  than 
Amos,  i.e.^  c.  745-735  ;  his  ministry  probably  began  about 
the  close  of  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II.,  continued  under 
his  successors,  and  ended  before  the  attack  of  Pekah  and 
Rezin  on  Ahaz,  and  the  carrying  captive  of  Galilee  and 
Gilead  by  Tiglath-Pileser,  to  which  events  there  is  no 
reference. 

Hosea  was  doubtless  a  citizen  of  the  northern  kingdom; 
notice  "our  king"^  of  the  king  of  Israel.  Hosea's  call  to 
the  prophetic  office  perhaps  came  through  his  family  troubles. 
His  wife,  who  had  borne  him  two  sons  and  a  daughter,  left 
him  for  another  man.  This  experience  may  have  brought 
home  to  him  the  corrupt  state  of  the  people.^  Eventually 
the  prophet  bought  his  wife  back  again,  and  received  her  into 
his  house. 

Critical  questions  are  confined  to  the  interpretation  of  i.-iii. 
and  the  authenticity  of  certain  passages,  especially  xiv. ;  see 
Contents.  The  lack  of  orderly  sequence  shows  that  the  book 
cannot  have  been  compiled  by  the  prophet  himself,  unless  it 
has  since  suffered  much  at  the  hands  of  editors. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — Hosea's  ministry  seems  to 
have  been  the  immediate  sequel  of  that  of  Amos.^  The 
Assyrians,  under  Tiglath-Pileser  III.,  began  to  harass  Syria 
towards  the  close  of  Jeroboam's  reign.  Jeroboam's  son, 
Zachariah,  after  a  reign  of  six  months,  was  murdered  by 
Shallum ;  Shallum,  a  month  later,  by  Menahem.  Menahem 
is  mentioned  in  an  Assyrian  inscription  as  tributary  to  Assyria. 
He  reigned  ten  years ;  his  son,  Pekahiah,  after  a  reign  of  two 
years,  was  murdered  by  Pekah.  Even  this  meagre  statement 
1  vii.  5.  2  See  on  i.-iii.  '  See  Amos,  (b). 


236  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

confirms  the  pictures  of  anarchy  and  confusion  drawn  by 
Hosea.  The  corruption  of  the  prosperous  days  of  Jeroboam 
II.  blossomed  into  open  vice  and  crime  in  the  disastrous  reigns 
of  his  successors. 

(c)  Contents. — i.-iii.,  By  divine  command  Hosea  marries  an 
immoral  woman,  Gomer,  who  bears  him  two  sons,  Jezreel, 
Lo-ammi  (not  my  people),  and  a  daughter,  Lo-nihamah  (not 
pitied).  She  left  him  to  live  an  immoral  life ;  he  bought  her 
back,  and  took  her  home,  where  he  kept  her  in  seclusion. 
Gomer  and  her  children  are  types  of  Israel,  its  infidelity  to 
Jehovah,  whom  it  forsook  for  the  Baalim,  and  its  punishment, 
and  ultimate  forgiveness. 

iii.  3b  is  obscure,  and  its  text  uncertain  ;  it  probably  means  that  Hosea 
would  not  associate  with  Gomer,  so  that  she  would  be  deprived  of  all 
conjugal  privileges,  with  a  view  to  her  reformation,  just  as  (see  following 
verses)  Israel  was  to  be  deprived  of  all  the  privileges  of  national  life,  for 
the  same  purpose.  These  chapters  have  been  interpreted  as  being  (i.)  a 
literal  account  of  Hosea's  actual  experiences  ;  (ii.)  purely  allegorical,  as  if 
Jehovah  had  said  to  Hosea :  Imagine  such  dealings  between  yourself  and 
an  unfaithful  wife  as  symbolising  my  dealings  with  Israel ;  (iii.)  founded  on 
fact,  e.g.f  Hosea's  wife  having  proved  unfaithful,  he  is  led  to  testify  against 
the  vice  of  his  times,  and  feels  that  he  was  as  divinely  led  to  his  un- 
happy marriage  for  this  purpose,  as  if  he  had  received  an  actual  divine 
command. 

Passages  contrasting  Judah  with  Israel,  *.^.,  i.  7,  iv.  15,  xi.  12b,  and, 
less  frequently,  other  references  to  Judah,  e.g.,  vi.  11,  viii.  14,  are  supposed 
to  be  additions  by  later  Jewish  editors.  Probably  Israel  should  be  read  for 
Judah  in  v.  10,  12,  13,  14.^ 

Similar  views  are  held  by  some  '^  as  to  the  passages  promising  restora- 
tion to  Israel,  e.g.,  i.  10,  11,  ii.  6,  7,  14,  16,  18-23,  "''•  5>  v.  15-vi.  3,  xi. 
8b,  9a,  10,  II,  xiv.» 

iv.-xiii.,  The  vice  and  immorality  of  Israel,  especially  of  the 

priests  and  rulers,  combined  with  the  immoral  and  superstitious 

worship  of  Jehovah  at  the  high  places,*  will  bring  Israel  to 

irrevocable  ruin,  in  spite  of  attempts  to  conclude  alliances 

with  Egypt  and  Assyria.^     Israel  shall  be  carried  captive  to 

Egypt  and  Assyria.^    Jehovah's  love  is  shown  in  His  yearning 

^  NowACK,  Minor  Prophets. 

"^  e.g.y  Cheyne  regards  i.  10,  11,  iii.  5,  v.  15-vi.  4,  xiv.  as  additions. 

*  See  below  on  xiv. 

*  iv.  12  ff.,  viii.  5  f.,  ix.  15,  x.  5,  15,  xii.  il. 
^  vii.  I,  viii.  9,  xii.  i. 

8  ix.  3,  6,  X.  6,  xi.  5. 


JOEL  237 

over  Israel,  His  reluctance  to  chastise  His  people,  and  by  His 
repeated  appeals  to  them  through  His  prophets.^ 
For  suspected  passages,  see  on  i.-iii.  and  xiv. 

xiv.,  Appeal  for  repentance,  and  promise  of  forgiveness  and 
restoration. 

Cheyne'  rejects  this  chapter,  chiefly  because  it  "is  akin  both  in 
language  and  imagery,  and  in  ideas  to  writings  of  the  age  which  begins 
with  Jeremiah."  But  G.  A.  Smith  unhesitatingly  accepts  xiv.  as  by 
Hosea,  though  probably  not  the  latest  of  his  utterances  preserved  in  our 
book.  The  list  given  in  connection  with  i.-iii.,  and  the  fact  that  the  last 
we  hear  of  Gomer  is  that  she  is  still  under  the  protection  of  Hosea,  show 
that  the  idea  of  restoration  runs  through  the  whole  book.  It  is  more  prob- 
able that  it  was  a  favourite  idea  of  Hosea,  than  that  editors  have  so 
systematically  and  successfully  interwoven  it  with  his  utterances.  The 
parallels  with  Jeremiah  and  later  writings  may  be  due  to  their  dependence 
on  Hosea ;  Jeremiah  especially  makes  large  use  of  Hosea. 

(d)  Significance  of  Hosea. — Hosea  endorses  Amos'  protest 
against  the  divorce  of  external  devotion  from  morality,  and 
sums  up  such  teaching  in  our  Lord's  favourite  quotation  ^ :  "  I 
desire  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice;  and  the  knowledge  of  God 
more  than  burnt  offerings"  —  a  verse  which  also  includes 
another  characteristic  doctrine  of  Hosea,  the  necessity  of 
the  knowledge  of  God,  i.e.,  intelligent  religion  and  spiritual 
experience.  Hosea  first,  as  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  later  on, 
denounces  foreign  alliances.  Like  Amos,  he  attacks  the 
high  places,  and  further  specifically  denounces  idols.*  The 
emphasis  laid  on  Jehovah's  love  for  Israel,  illustrates  the 
prophet's  intense  love  for  his  country,  and  his  deep  distress 
at  her  coming  ruin. 

Other  quotations  in  N.T. :  i.  10,  ii.  23,  Romans  ix.  25,  26; 
X.  8,  Luke  xxiii.  30 ;  xi.  i,  "  I  called  my  son  (Israel)  out  of 
Egypt,"  appHed  to  Christ,  Matthew  ii.  15;  xiii.  4,  i.  Corin- 
thians XV.  55  f.,  " O  death,  where  is  thy  sting?  etc." 

3.  JoeL 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — Nothing  is  known  of  the  author 
beyond  his  name  "  Joel,  the  son  of  Pethuel,"  or  as  the  LXX., 

*  V.  iS-vi.  6,  vii.  I,  xi.  l-il,  xii.  6. 

2  Introduction  to  1895  edition  of  W.  R.  Smith's  Prophets  of  Israel, 
p.  xix. 

•  vi.  6  (/!  Matt.  ix.  13,  xii,  7.  *  iv.  17,  viii.  4,  xiii.  2,  xiv.  8. 


238  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Syr.,  and  some  other  versions  have  it  "  Bethuel "  ;  and,  what 
may  be  gathered  from  the  book  itself,  that  he  was  a  Jew, 
probably  of  Jerusalem,  and  possibly  a  priest. 

As  in  the  case  of  Zechariah  ix.-xiv.,  the  notes  of  time  have 
been  very  differently  interpreted.  Some  regard  Joel  as  the 
earliest  of  the  prophetical  books,  and  assign  it  to  the  early 
part  of  the  reign  of  Joash  of  Judah,  c.  830 ;  but  the  general 
opinion  inclines  more  and  more  to  a  post-exilic  date.  The 
main  points,  capable  of  opposite  interpretations,  are  as 
follows :  (i.)  Joel  makes  no  reference  whatever  to  the  Syrians, 
Assyrians,  or  Chaldaeans.  These  nations  figure  constantly 
in  history  and  prophecy  from  the  time  of  Ahaz  and  Amos 
till  the  Exile.  Even  later  Zechariah  is  still  interested  in 
Babylon.  This  silence  points  to  a  date  before  Ahaz  or 
after  Zechariah.  (ii.)  Joel  mentions  neither  king  nor  princes, 
but,  in  their  stead,  elders  and  priests  are  prominent.^  This 
has  been  explained  of  the  minority  of  Joash,  when  Jehoiada 
the  priest  controlled  the  government  of  Judah,^  but  agrees 
better  with  the  post-exilic  period  when  there  was  no  king,  and 
the  high  priest  was  the  chief  Jewish  authority,  (iii.)  Egypt 
and  Edom  are  denounced  for  shedding  "  innocent  blood  "  in 
Judah.3  This  has  been  connected  with  Shishak's  invasion  in 
the  reign  of  Rehoboam,  and  the  revolt  of  Edom  under  Jeho- 
ram,  the  grandfather  of  Joash.  But  these  events  were  remote 
in  the  time  of  Joash ;  hatred  of  Edom  is  a  constant  note  of 
post-exilic  literature ;  the  mention  of  Egypt  may  be  a  literary 
reminiscence  of  the  condemnation  of  Egypt  by  the  older 
prophets ;  or  may  refer  to  the  Ptolemies,  (iv.)  Joel  presents 
a  remarkable  number  of  parallels  with  other  O.T.  literature. 
Either  Joel  is  a  very  early  and  popular  book,  constantly  used 
by  writers  from  Amos  to  Malachi ;  or  he  is  a  very  late  author, 
who  made  large  use  of  his  predecessors.  Each  of  the  two 
views  has  been  strongly  held,  but  the  latter  is  the  more 
probable.  The  easy  and  classical  style  of  Joel  is  best  under- 
stood as  that  of  an  accomplished  student  of  earlier  literature.* 

*  i.  9,  13,  14,  ii.  17.  '^  ii.  Kings  xii.  2.  ^  iij    ,g^ 

*  G.  Gray,  Expositor^  September,  1893;  Driver,  C.B.S.^  Joel,  etc., 
pp.  19  ff. 


JOEL  239 

Thus  the  less  decisive  notes  of  time  point,  on  the  whole,  to 
the  period  after  the  Exile ;  and  this  date  is  conclusively  con- 
firmed by  the  following  considerations ;  the  mention  of  the 
Greeks,^  the  entire  silence  as  to  the  northern  kingdom,  and 
the  use  of  the  term  "  Israel "  in  the  post-exilic  sense  of  Judah 
as  representing  the  chosen  people  2 ;  the  description  of  God's 
people  as  "scattered  among  the  nations,"  who  have  "parted 
my  land  "  between  them  ^ ;  silence  as  to  idolatry,  and  anxiety 
for  the  regular  maintenance  of  the  Temple  services,  which 
priests  and  people  do  their  best  to  maintain.* 

This  last  point  suggests  a  date  subsequent  to  the  reforms  of 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah;  otherwise  the  evidence  is  not  definite 
enough  to  enable  us  to  assign  the  book  to  any  precise  date. 
Driver  ^  inclines  to  a  date  shortly  after  Haggai  and  Zechariah 
i.-viii.^ 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — The  plague  of  locusts,  which 
was  the  occasion  of  this  book,  occurred  at  some  time  in  the 
Persian  period''  when  the  Temple  services  were  carefully 
observed,  and  when  the  Jews  had  suffered  from  border  raids 
of  their  neighbours. 

(c)  Contents. — i.  i-ii.  11,  The  prophet  describes  a  plague  of 
locusts,  which  afflicted  Judah  in  his  time,  which  he  regards 
partly  as  a  "  Day  of  Jehovah,"  or  special  divine  judgment  ; 
partly  as  a  warning  of  a  "  day "  yet  to  come,  which  he 
depicts  under  the  figure  of  a  yet  more  terrible  visitation  of 
locusts. 

Some  regard  the  section  as  altogether  a  figurative  description  of  a  great 
invasion,  either  actual  or  predicted ;  others,  as  altogether  a  prediction 
either  of  an  actual  plague  of  locusts,  or  of  a  future  judgment. 

ii.  12-17,  Exhortation  to  repentance. 

ii.  18-27,  Fertile  seasons  to  be  restored  to  penitent  Israel. 

ii.  28-32,  Universal  outpouring  of  the  Spirit. 

1  iii.  6. 

'  Cf,  ii,  23,  with  ii.  27  ;  iii.  i  with  iii.  2;  and  iii.  i6b  with  iii.  i6a,  17. 

3  iii.  2.  *  i.  9,  13  ;  ii.  14.  °  C.B.S.,  p.  25. 

•  Konig  assigns  Joel  to  the  end  of  Josiah's  reign,  when  Judah  suffered 
at  the  hands  of  the  Egyptian  king,  Pharaoh  Necho.  Rothstein  assigns  i., 
ii.  to  the  minority  of  Joash,  iii.,  iv.  to  the  period  after  the  exile. 


240  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

iii.,  The  nations  gathered  in  the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat 
("Jehovah  judges")  to  be  judged.  Special  punishment  of 
Tyre,  Zidon,  Philistia,  Egypt,  and  Edom  for  wrongs  done  to 
Judah.  Judah  and  Jerusalem  delivered  and  purified,  and 
established  in  permanent  prosperity. 

(d)  Significance  of  Joel y  and  use  in  N.T. — The  apocalyptic 
vision  of  the  last  section  is  dependent  on  Ezekiel  xxxviii., 
xxxix.,  and  may  underlie  Zechariah  xii.-xiv.  and  Isaiah  xxiv.- 
xxvii.  Note  also  the  absence  of  any  Davidic  Messiah;  Jehovah 
Himself  intervenes. 

Most  striking  is  the  passage  which  furnished  Peter  with  his 
text  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost,^  "Afterwards  will  I  pour  out 
my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh ;  your  sons  and  daughters  shall 
prophesy,  your  old  men  shall  dream  dreams,  your  young 
men  shall  see  visions :  even  upon  the  slaves,  both  men 
and  women,  will  I  pour  out  my  Spirit  in  those  days."  This 
passage  is  akin  to  Jeremiah's  New  Covenant  written  in  every 
heart.2 

4.  Amos. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — Nothing  is  known  except  what 
may  be  learnt  from  the  book  itself.  According  to  i.  i,  Amos^ 
was  a  herdsman  of  Tekoa  in  the  reigns  of  Uzziah  of  Judah 
and  Jeroboam  II.  of  Israel,  i.e.^  between  c.  778  and  c.  736, 
and  between  c.  783  and  c.  743,  and  prophesied  concerning 
Israel,  "two  years  before  the  earthquake."  In  vii.  14  Amos 
repudiates  any  connection  with  the  guilds  of  professional 
prophets,  and  styles  himself  "a  herdsman  and  a  dresser  of 
sycamore  trees."  The  contents  of  the  book  quite  agree 
with  these  statements.  We  further  learn  ^  that  Amos 
appeared  at  the  temple  at  Bethel,  probably  at  a  festival, 
denounced  Jeroboam,  and  was  driven  away  by  the  priest 
Amaziah. 

Amos'  ministry  to  Israel,  and  the  mention  of  sycamores, 

^  ii.  28 ;  Acts  ii.  17-21,  cf,  Romans  x.  13. 

*  Jeremiah  xxxi.  31  ff.,  cf.  Ezekiel  xxxvi.  26. 

5  i.e.y  'Am3s;  the  father  of  Isaiah  was  'Am6f, 

*  vii.  10-17, 


AMOS  241 

not  found  at  the  Judaean  Tekoa,  have  led  to  the  suggestion 
that  he  belonged  to  some  Tekoa  in  the  northern  kingdom; 
but  Tekoa  here  is  Tekoa  in  Judah,^  six  miles  south  of 
Bethlehem.  "Herdsman" 2  denotes  keeper  of  a  peculiar 
breed  of  sheep.  His  second  occupation  and  the  lack  of 
sycamores  at  Tekoa  show  that  he  led  his  flocks  some  distance 
from  home.  Nothing  more  is  known  about  the  earthquake  ^  ; 
but  the  power  of  Jeroboam  seems  at  its  height,  so  that  the 
book  may  be  dated  c,  750,  some  little  time  before  the  close  of 
the  reign. 

Critical  questions  merely  concern  sections  of  the  book ;  see 
below  on  ii.  4,  5. 

The  book  may  have  been  compiled  by  the  prophet  himself, 
or  by  one  of  his  disciples. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — Under  Uzziah  and  Jeroboam, 
Judah  and  still  more  Israel  enjoyed  a  great  revival  of  power 
and  prosperity,*  which,  however,  as  we  learn  from  the  pro- 
phetical books,  was  accompanied  by  social  corruption  and 
the  oppression  of  the  poor  and  helpless.  The  formation 
of  great  estates  resulted  in  the  growth  of  a  landless,  pauper 
class.  Yet  the  worship  of  Jehovah  was  carried  on  with 
great  splendour  and  assiduous  devotion  at  many  sanctuaries, 
and  Jeroboam  had  been  encouraged  in  his  successful  wars 
by  Jonah  ben  Amittai,  whom  Kings  recognises  as  a  true 
prophet. 

The  revival  of  Israel  was  due  to  two  causes :  the  power  of 
Damascus  had  been  broken  by  the  Assyrian  kings,  Ramman- 
nirari  III.  and  Shalmaneser  III.,  etc.,  811-767;  and  the 
Assyrians  did  not  push  their  advantages  further,  but,  for  the 
time,  allowed  Jeroboam  to  reap  the  fruits  of  their  victories. 
Amos'  ministry,  however,  immediately  preceded  the  accession 
of  Tiglath-Pileser  III.,  745,  who  resumed  the  forward  move- 
ment of  Assyria  in  South  Western  Asia. 

(c)  Contents. — i.  i-ii.  3,  Oracles  against  Damascus,  the 
Philistines,  Tyre,  Edom,  Ammon,  and  Moab.     They  will  be 

^  Cf.\.  2^  vii.  12.  '  N5qed. 

•  Cf.  Zech.  xiv.  5.  *  ii.  Kings  xiv.  23-29. 


242  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

punished  for  their  sins  against  Israel  and  against  each  other ; 
i.  II,  12  (Edom)  may  be  an  interpolation. 

ii.  4-5,  The  Doom  of  Judah. 

This  section  with  the  other  references  to  Judah,  i.  2,  "from  Zion," 
vi.  I,  ix.  II,  12  are  sometimes  held  to  be  interpolations,  partly  because 
the  prophet  elsewhere  seems  exclusively  interested  in  Israel. 

ii.  6-16,  The  Doom  of  Israel  for  vice,  oppression  of  the 
poor,  and  the  silencing  of  true  prophets. 

iii.-vi.  enlarge  upon  the  theme  of  the  previous  section. 
Prophecy  has  its  adequate  cause,  Jehovah's  communications 
to  His  servants.^  The  high  places,  Bethel,  Gilgal,  Beersheba,^ 
and  their  splendid  worship  is  rejected  by  Jehovah,  because 
combined  with  cruelty  and  vice.^  Jehovah  will  not  dehver 
them  in  His  "  Day,"  but  chastise  them  by  a  cruel  invader  who 
will  carry  them  captive  beyond  Damascus.* 

The  doxologies  to  God  as  Creator  and  Ruler,  iv.  13,  v.  8,  9,  ix.  5,  6, 
may  be  interpolations ;  they  are  parallel  in  style  and  ideas  to  II.  Isaiah, 
and  interrupt  the  context. 

vii.  1-9,  Visions  of  locusts,  fire,  Jehovah  with  a  plumb-line 
symbolise  the  ruin  of  Israel. 

vii.  10-17,  Amos  at  Bethel. 

viii..  Vision  of  a  basket  of  summer  fruit,  symbolising  the 
speedy  decay  of  Israel. 

ix.  1-7,  Vision  of  Jehovah  at  the  altar,  inflicting  chastise- 
ment, from  which  there  is  no  escape.^ 

ix.  8-15,  The  Restoration  of  Israel  after  its  purification. 

These  verses  are  often  regarded  as  a  later  addition,  because  they 
contrast  with  the  unqualified  predictions  of  ruin  in  the  rest  of  the 
book  ;  because  '  *  the  fallen  tabernacle  of  David "  implies  the  fall  of 
the  dynasty,  586 ;  because  of  the  hostile  reference  to  the  remnant 
of  Edom,  and  other  points  of  contact  with  exilic  and  post-exilic 
literature.  Dr.  Driver,  however,  still  assigns  them  to  Amos,  with  some 
hesitation.^ 

(d)  Significance  of  Amos^  and  Use  in  N.T. — Apart  from 

fragments  in  later  works,  Amos  is  the  earliest  prophet  whose 

words  are  extant  in  writing.      He  also   first   indicates   the 

1  iii.  1-8.  2  iy_  ^^  V.  5.  »  V.  18-27. 

*  V.  18,  27,  vi.  14.  ^  On  ix.  5,  6  see  on  iil-vi. 

^  C.B.S.y  Joel  and  Amos,  119  fif ;  the  section  is  rejected  by  Cheyne  and 
G.  A.  Smith.  Amongst  other  suspected  passages  are  i.  9,  10,  iii.  14  b, 
V.  13-15,  26,  vi.  2,  9,  10,  viii.  6,  8,  11,  12,  13. 


OBADIAH  243 

severance  between  true  prophecy  and  the  prophetic  order 
which  is  conspicuous  in  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel.  But  his 
most  important  characteristic  is  that  he  strikes  the  keynote 
of  eighth  century  prophecy.  Popular  faith  dwelt  on  the 
privileges  of  the  Chosen  People,  and  trusted  that  Jehovah, 
if  honoured  by  adequate  external  rites,  would  always  be 
the  Champion  of  Israel.  Amos  insists  on  the  responsibility 
of  being  God's  people :  "  You  only  have  I  known  of  all 
the  families  of  the  earth:  therefore  will  I  visit  upon  you 
all  your  iniquities."  To  a  cruel  and  selfish  people,  however 
externally  devout,  "  The  Day  of  Jehovah  is  darkness  and 
not  light."  ^  God  is  a  moral  being,  and  requires  above 
all  else  personal  and  social  morality  in  His  people.  Acts 
vii.  42  f.  appeals  to  v.  25  f.  as  a  proof  of  the  ingrained 
depravity  of  Israel,  and  Acts  xv.  16  f.  quotes  LXX.2  of 
ix.  II  f.  as  a  prediction  of  the  universality  of  the  gospel. 

5.  Obadiah. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — Nothing  is  known  of  Obadiah. 
As  to  the  book,  three  things  are  clear ;  the  utterance  on  Edora 
in  Jeremiah  makes  use  either  of  verses  1-9  or  of  the  original 
upon  which  they  are  based  ^ ;  10-14  refer  to  the  Fall  of  Jeru- 
salem, 586;  1-9  and  15-21  refer  to  two  quite  different  situa- 
tions, and  are  probably  of  different  origin. 

It  is  not  clear  whether  10-14  is  to  be  connected  with  1-9 
or  with  1 5-2 1 ;  nor  is  the  Jeremianic  authorship  of  Jeremiah 
xlix.  7-22  universally  accepted.'* 

The  most  probable  account  of  the  composition  of  the  book 
is  as  follows  : — 

Verses  1-9  contain  an  ancient  pre-exilic  oracle  on  Edom, 
the  occasion  of  which  cannot  be  determined;  verses  10-21 
are  exilic.    There  may  also  be  later  additions. 

*  iii.  2,  V.  18. 

2  Reading  'adam,  "  Man,"  for  Edom. 

'  i'»-4=  Jeremiah  xlix.  14-16;  5  =  Jeremiah  9 ;  c/.  also  6  with  Jeremiah 
10*,  and  8  with  Jeremiah  7. 

*  e.^. ,  not  by  Giesebrecht. 


^44  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

So  substantially  G.  A.  Smith,  The  Twelve,  ii.  172.  Orelli,  etc.,  regard 
the  book  as  a  single  pre-exilic  work.  Wellhausen,  on  the  other  hand, 
regards  both  sections  as  post-exilic.  Sepharad,  v.  20,  has  been  identified 
with  Saparda  in  Babylonia  (Schrader),  a  view  consistent  with  an  exilic 
date  ;  and  with  Saparda  in  Bithynia  or  Galatia  (Cheyne,  Sayce,  Higher 
Criticism,  etc.,  483),  a  view  requiring  a  post-exilic  date,  as  these  countries 
were  not  held  by  Assyria  or  Babylon,  but  formed  part  of  the  Persian 
Empire  ;  LXX.  has  Ephratha  for  Sepharad,  and  the  text  of  19,  20  is 
much  corrupted.     Volck  dates  in  reign  of  Joram  of  Judah. 

(b)  Contents. — 1-6,  8,  9,  Proud  Edom  to  be  destroyed  by 
the  nations. 

7,  Edom  is  driven  out  of  her  territory  by  treacherous  allies. 
Probably  a  later  addition  referring  to  the  occupation  of  Edom 
by  Nabatean  Arabs  in  the  post-exilic  period. 

10-14,  Edom  exults  over  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  assists 
the  invaders. 

1 1-2 1,  In  the  day  of  Jehovah,  when  He  deals  with  all  the 
nations,  Edom  is  utterly  destroyed  by  Israel,  which  re-occupies 
all  its  former  territory,  including  Edom. 

Obadiah  is  not  quoted  in  N.T. 

6.  Jonah. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — The  book  of  Jonah  is  anony- 
mous, and  makes  no  statement  as  to  its  date.  It  is  a  narrative 
about  Jonah,  and  does  not  profess  to  have  been  written  by 
him.  Jonah  ben  Amittai,  the  subject  of  the  narrative,  is  only 
mentioned  elsewhere  in  O.T.  in  ii.  Kings  xiv.  25,  *'He  [Jero- 
boam II.,  c.  783-743]  restored  the  border  of  Israel  from  the 
entering  in  of  Hamath  unto  the  sea  of  the  Arabah,  according 
to  the  word  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  Which  he  spake 
by  the  hand  of  his  servant,  Jonah  ben  Amittai,  the  prophet, 
which  was  of  Gath-hepher "  [a  border  town  of  Zebulun ; 
Joshua  xix.  13]. 

The  story  is  vivid  and  detailed,  and  if  it  were  a  simple 
narrative  of  facts,  we  might  suppose  that  it  was  written,  at 
any  rate,  on  Jonah's  authority,  and  while  the  experience  was 
still  fresh  in  his  memory.  Accordingly  the  editors  of  the 
Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets  ^  place  the  book  fifth. 

But  the  internal  evidence  shows  that  the  book  is  much  later, 
»  See  §  I. 


JONAH  245 

certainly  post-exilic.  It  has  been  assigned  to  various  dates  in 
the  Persian  and  Greek  periods,  />.,  between  B.C.  536  and  B.C. 
150. 

The  idiom  and  vocabulary  of  the  book  are  those  of  the 
latest  period  of  O.T.  Hebrew;  and  it  has  a  marked  affinity 
with  Ecclesiastes,  c,  B.C.  250,  and  contains  many  Aramaic 
words. 

The  book  has  many  parallels  with  post-exilic  literature. 
The  statement  that  God  made  the  sea  and  the  dry  land,  i.  9, 
is  probably  a  reminiscence  of  Genesis  i.  9,  where  the  same 
'^oxdi  yabbcisha  is  used.  The  prayer  or  psalm,  ii.  2-10,  is  mainly 
a  cento  of  phrases  from  the  Psalms,  and  partly  from  post- 
exilic  psalms,  such  as  cxlii. 

Compare  also 

Verse  2  =  Psalms  xviii.  5,  6,  cxx.  i. 

Verse  3b  =  Psalm  xlii.  7b. 

Verse  4a  =  Psalm  xxxi.  22a,  Lamentations  ill.  54b. 

Verse  5a  =^  Psalms  xviii.  4,  Ixix.  i,  cxvi.  3. 

Verse  7a  =  Psalm  cxlii.  3a. 

Verse  9  =  Psalms  iii.  8,  1.  14. 

And  iii.  9,  "Who  knoweth  if  God  will  turn  and  repent,"  with  Joel  ii.  14, 
**  Who  knoweth  if  he  will  turn  and  repent."  In  iv.  2,  **  A  gracious  God, 
merciful,  slow  to  anger,  and  of  great  kindness,  and  repentest  thee  of  the 
evil,"  is  probably  based  on  Exodus  xxxiv.  6 ;  cf.  Joel  ii.  13,  Psalms  Ixxxvi. 
15,  ciii.  8,  which  are  based  on  the  same  passage. 

Although  there  are  many  vivid  details,  they  are  such  as 
might  be  suggested  by  ordinary  experiences,  a  storm  at  sea, 
or  exposure  to  the  sun ;  there  are  none  of  those  casual 
allusions  to  time,  place  or  person,  which  we  expect  in  a 
man's  account  of  his  own  experiences;  we  are  not  told  the 
name  of  the  king  of  Nineveh,  nor  anything  about  the  route 
from  the  great  fish  to  that  city. 

Moreover  the  phrase  "  king  of  Nineveh  "  was  never  used  of 
the  Assyrian  kings,  and  its  use,  together  with  iii.  3,  "  Nineveh 
was  an  exceeding  great  city,"  implies  that  the  Assyrian  empire 
had  long  since  passed  away. 

Eudde  has  suggested  that  the  book  is  an  esccerpt  from  the  Midrash  or 
free  expansion  of  the  Book  of  Kings,  which  is  commonly  assumed  as  the 
main  source  of  Chronicles. 


246  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(b)  Contents. — Jonah  attempting  to  escape  from  the  mission 
to  Nineveh  is  swallowed  by  a  great  fish.  He  is  released, 
preaches  at  Nineveh,  the  people  repent  and  are  forgiven, 
at  which  he  is  angry,  and  is  rebuked  by  Jehovah. 

The  Psalm  ii.  2-10  is  sometimes  supposed  to  be  a  later  addition. 

(c)  Significance  of  the  Book  of  Jonah,  and  use  in  N.  T. — The 
book  is  commonly  regarded  as  an  allegory  or  parable.  Prof. 
G.  A.  Smith  writes  ^ :  "  Nor  does  this  book  .  .  .  claim  to  be 
real  history.  On  the  contrary,  it  offers  us  all  the  marks  of  the 
parable  or  allegory  ...  we  really  sin  against  the  intention  of 
the  author,  and  the  purposes  of  the  spirit  which  inspired  him, 
when  we  wilfully  interpret  the  book  as  real  history." 

Our  Lord's  casual  references  ^  neither  state  nor  imply  that 
the  book  is  history.  Again,  Prof.  G.  A.  Smith  writes  ^ :  "  We 
do  not  believe  that  our  Lord  had  any  thought  of  confirming 
or  not  confirming  the  historic  character  of  the  story.  His 
purpose  was  purely  one  of  exhortation,  and  we  feel  the 
grounds  of  that  exhortation  to  be  just  as  strong  when  we 
have  proven  the  Book  of  Jonah  to  be  a  parable.  Christ  is 
using  an  illustration  :  it  surely  matters  not  whether  that  illus- 
tration be  drawn  from  the  realms  of  fact  or  of  poetry." 

The  book  represents  the  broader  spirit  of  post-exilic 
Judaism,  it  protests  against  the  narrow  exclusiveness  which 
culminated  in  Pharisaism,  by  teaching  that  the  Gentiles 
might  repent  and  be  forgiven  ;  it  prepared  the  way  for  the 
doctrine  of  universal  salvation  by  faith,  and  connects  the 
great  prophets  with  Christ. 

The  book  also  furnishes  a  most  conspicuous  example  of  the 
conditional  character  of  prophetic  prediction ;  promises  might 
be  forfeited  by  backsliding,  threats  might  be  averted  by  re- 
pentance. Jonah  states  most  categorically,'*  "  Yet  forty  days, 
and  Nineveh  shall  be  overthrown";  but  the  people  repent, 
and  God  does  not  overthrow  the  city. 

1  The  Twelve,  ii,  498-500. 
^  Matthew  xii.  39  fF.,  xvi.  4,  Luke  xi.  29  ff. 
'  The  Twelve t  ii.  508,  and  <;^.  context. 
*  iii.  4. 


MICAH  247 

7.  Micah. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — According  to  i.  i  Micah  pro- 
phesied in  the  reigns  of  Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,  c.  740 
to  c.  695;  and  Jeremiah  xxvi.  18  f.  quotes  iii.  12  as  having 
been  uttered  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  and  as  having  led 
the  king  to  repentance.  Chapters  i.-iii.  clearly  belong  to 
the  period  of  the  Fall  of  Samaria;  iv.-vii.  are  the  subject 
of  much  controversy.  Cheyne  ^  writes  :  "  It  is  becoming 
more  and  more  doubtful  whether  more  than  two  or  three 
fragments  of  the  heterogeneous  collection  of  fragments  in 
chapters  iv.-vii.  can  have  come  from"  Micah.  G.  A.  Smith, 
however,  challenges  this  statement,^  and  calls  attention  to 
recent  monographs^  which  defend  the  substantial  integrity 
of  the  book.  It  is  difficult  to  resist  the  impression  that 
there  is  a  marked  contrast  in  style  and  thought  between 
i.-iii.  and  iv.-vii.,  which  suggests  a  different  age  and  author 
for  the  latter  section;  but  it  is  equally  difficult  to  estimate 
the  evidential  value  of  such  an  impression.  See  further 
Contents  on  the  several  sections. 

Micah  is  styled  "  the  Morasthite,"  *  probably  as  belonging 
to  the  "  Moresheth-gath "  of  i.  14,  which  Jerome  identifies 
with  a  "  Morasthi "  existing  in  his  time  to  the  east  of 
Eleutheropolis,  />.,  in  the  Shephelah,  or  low  hills  on  the 
western  outskirts  of  Judah. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — The  beginning  of  Micah's 
ministry  has  been  placed  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Ahaz, 
c.  736,  and  its  close  as  late  as  that  of  Manasseh,  />., 
after  c.  695.  His  ministry  may  have  been  either  an 
immediate  sequel  to  that  of  Hosea,  covering  the  reigns  of  the 
last  kings  of  Israel,  or  it  may  have  partly  coincided  with  and 
partly  extended  beyond  the  last  half  of  Isaiah's  ministry,  thus 
covering  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  and  the  accession  of 
Manasseh.     For  these  periods  see  Hosea,  (b),  and  Isaiah. 

^  Introd.  to  W.  R.  Smith's  Prophets^  xxiii. 

2  The  Twelve,  I.  xxiv. 

'  By  WiLDEBOER,  Von  Ryssel,  and  Elhorst. 

*  Both  in  i.  i  and  Jer.  xxvi.  18,  *^Muaiah  the  M."  in  some  texts. 


248  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(c)  Contents. — i.-iii.,  Doom  of  Samaria  and  Jerusalem  for 
the  sins  of  the  nation,  especially  social  wrongs  committed 
by  the  rulers,  whose  bribes  are  accepted  by  priests  and 
prophets,  and  the  idolatrous  worship  of  the  high  places. 

The  prophecy  of  restoration,  ii.  12  f.,  interrupts  the  connection,  and 
is  generally  held  to  be  out  of  place,^  and  by  many  to  be  a  post-exilic 
addition,^  parallel  to  sections  of  II.  Isaiah. 

The  threats  against  Samaria'  seem  to  fix  the  date  of  i.  before  its 
capture,  722 ;  but,  as  a  document,  at  any  rate,  it  may  have  been  written 
about  that  date.  An  Assyrian  inscription  affords  some  slight  ground  for 
doubting  whether  Samaria  was  destroyed  after  this  capture,^  if  not  the 
chapter  may  be  later. 

Chapters  ii.,  iii.  show  no  consciousness  of  imminent  danger,  and  belong 
to  some  period  after  722,  when  the  fear  of  an  immediate  A^yrian  advance 
had  died  away,  and  there  seemed  no  prospect  of  any  speedy  renewal  of  the 
Assyrian  invasion. 

iv.  1-5,  Jerusalem  the  centre  of  Revelation  for  all  nations 
in  the  Messianic  Era  of  universal  peace. 

Cf.  on  Isaiah  ii.  2-4  with  which  1-3  is  nearly  identical. 

iv.  6-v.  15,  Deliverance  of  the  nation,  after  the  capture 
of  Jerusalem  and  the  carrying  captive  to  Babylon,  by  a 
Righteous  Ruler  from  Bethlehem,  who  shall  lay  waste 
Assyria.  God  will  deliver  the  land  from  superstition,  and 
enable  it  to  dispense  with  horses,  chariots,  and  fortresses. 

This  section  is  a  compilation  of  separate  fragments,  some  of  which  are 
not  Micah's.  The  references  to  the  Assyrians  may  well  be  Micah's, 
written  perhaps  at  the  time  of  Sennacherib's  invasion.  The  "  Babylon" 
clause  in  iv.  10  is  generally  held  to  be  a  later  addition.  Nowack  accepts 
only  iv.  9  f.  (except  the  Babylon  clause),  14,  v.  9-13  as  Micah's. 

vi.  i-vii.  6,  Jehovah's  controversy  with  Israel ;  His  demand 
for  "  mercy  and  not  sacrifice  "  illustrated  by  Balaam's  answer 
to  Balak.  Fraud  in  business  to  be  punished  by  bad  seasons. 
Persecution  of  the  righteous,  and  utter  social  depravity. 

The  picture  in  vii.  1-6  seems  too  dark  for  the  reign  of  Hezekiah, 
and  these  verses  are  often  referred  to  the  reign  of  Manasseh,  with 
which  vi.  1-8  may  be  connected  by  the  reference  to  child  sacrifice.' 
Even  if  written  under  Manasseh,  the  author  may  still  be  Micah ;  but  the 
difference  of  style  and  thought  rather  points  to  a  different  author. 

^  Driver,  G.  A.  Smith,  Steiner,  etc. 

^  Cheyne,  Wellhausen,  Nowack.  '  i.  1,6. 

*  Samshnuruna  in  Sennacherib's  inscription,  Taylor  Prism,  Kellner's 
Isaiah,  34,  is  sometimes  identified  with  Samaria. 

5  vi.  7,  vii.  2,  cf.  ii.  Kings  xxi.  6,  16;  but  Ahaz  also  practised  child 
sacrifice,  ii.  Kings  xvi.  3. 


MICAH  249 

vii.  7-20,  Zion  is  suffering  for  sin;  yet  confidently  expects 
from  God  pardon  and  deliverance,  victory  and  universal 
dominion. 

According  to  G.  A.  Smith,i  "a  Psalm  composed  of  little  pieces 
from  various  dates,"  from  before  the  Fall  of  Samaria,  722,  to  soon 
after  the  Exile.  Others  also  think  that  the  references  to  Assyria, 
Gilead,  and  Bashan  best_  suit  a  date  not  long  before  Nehemiah.^  Driver, 
on  the  other  hand,  inclines  to  assign  the  passage  to  Micah  in  the  time 
of  Manasseh.^ 

(d)  Significance  of  the  Book  of  Micah^  and  Use  in  N.T. — 

The  book,  both  in  i.-iii.  and  elsewhere,  insists  on  the  leading 

themes   of  Amos,  Hosea,  and   Isaiah,  the  protests  against 

the  high  places  and  their  corrupt  rites,*  against  social  wrong, 

sanctioned  by  the  ministers   of  religion.^     Even  if  vi.   1-9 

be  a   later    passage,    in   which    these    doctrines    are   more 

thoroughly  thought  out  and  carefully  formulated,  it,  at  any 

rate,   furnishes  an   eloquent  and  explicit   statement  of  the 

demand   of  eighth   century  prophecy  for  a  moral  life  and 

spiritual    religion   rather  than   external    ritual.     "Wherewith 

shall  I  come  before  Jehovah,  and   bow  myself  before  the 

high  God?   shall  I  come  before  Him  with  burnt  offerings, 

with  calves  of  a  year  old?     Will  Jehovah  be  pleased  with 

thousands  of  rams,  or  with  ten  thousands  of  rivers  of  oil? 

shall  I  give  my  firstborn  for  my  transgression,  the  fruit  of 

my  body  for  the  sin  of  my  soul?     He  hath  shewed  thee, 

O  man,  what  is  good;   and  what  doth  Jehovah  require  of 

thee,   but  to  do  justly,   and   to  love  mercy,   and  to   walk 

humbly  with  thy  God?"^    The   wrongful  accumulation   of 

great    estates    is    specially    mentioned   as    a   flagrant   social 

evil.'^     Micah,    like   most   of   the   canonical   prophets,   is  in 

antagonism    to    the    prophetic    order.^     If    iv.    and   v.    are 

Micah's,  or  even   of  the  reign   of   Manasseh,  we  have  an 

early  suggestion  of  the  apocalyptic  visions  of  the  last  things, 

1  The  Twelve,  i.  374. 

2  Wellhausen,  Nowack. 

*  313,  quoting  Elhorst  in  support  of  the  view. 

*  i.  1-9,  V.  12-14.  ^  ii.,  iii. 

*  vi.  6-8,  cf  Psalm  1.  8-15,  probably  post-exilic. 
'  ii.  1-3.  ^  iii.  5-11. 


250  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

connected  in  v.  2  with  the  personal  deliverer,  the  Messiah. 
In  V.  10-14,  with  its  condemnation  of  horses  and  chariots, 
images  and  Asherim,  we  have  a  parallel  to  Deuteronomic 
passages.!  Again,  vii.  8-20,  with  its  confession  of  sin,  and 
confidence  in  the  pardoning  love  of  God  to  the  penitent,  its 
tender  passion  of  prayer,  is  one  of  the  passages  in  which 
O.T.  Revelation  culminates,  and  most  nearly  anticipates  the 
evangehcal  teaching  of  the  gospel. 

Micah  v.  2  is  appealed  to  in  Matthew  ii.  6  as  an 
authority  for  the  statement  that  the  Messiah  is  to  be  born 
at  Bethlehem.2 

8.  Nahum. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — In  i.  i  Nahum  is  styled  "the 
Elkoshite,"  which  probably  means  "  man  of  Elkosh."  Elkosh 
is  unknown,  but  there  are  various  conjectures.  Jerome  men- 
tions "  Helkesei "  in  Galilee,  and  Capernaum  ( =  village  of 
Nahum)  seems  to  connect  Nahum  with  Galilee.  If  so,  he 
was  a  northern  refugee  in  Jerusalem.  Epiphanius,  c,  a.d.  360, 
locates  Elkosh  in  the  south  of  Judah.  Some  moderns  find 
Elkosh  in  the  modern  Alkush,  two  days'  journey  to  the  north 
of  the  site  of  Nineveh,  thus  making  Nahum  an  Israehte 
captive  in  Assyria. 

The  book  was  written  between  the  sack  of  No-Amon,  the 
Egyptian  Thebes,  c.  663,  which  it  describes,  and  the  Fall  of 
Nineveh,  c.  606,  which  it  predicts.  The  precise  date  is  un- 
certain. Perhaps  the  vivid  pictures  of  imminent  ruin  reflect 
the  last  agonies  of  Assyria,  in  the  period  just  before  the  fall  of 
its  capital. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — This  period  coincides  with 
the  latter  years  of  Josiah's  reign,  after  the  Deuteronomic  re- 
formation had  secured  comparative  purity  of  life  and  worship, 
and  after  the  retreat  of  the  Scythians  had  left  Judah  a  breath- 
ing space  of  peace  and  prosperity. 

For  663-621  see  §  10. 

^  Deut.  xvi.  21,  22,  xvii.  16  j  cf,  Hosea  iii.  4. 
2  Cf.  John  vil  42. 


HABAKKUK  251 

(c)  Contents. — i.,  Psalm  describing  a  Theophany  in  which 

Jehovah  destroys  the  enemies  of  His  people. 

Cheyne^  and  others  regard  i.  as  post-exilic.  Bickell,  G.  B.  Gray,  etc., 
find  in  it  a  mutilated  and  distorted  alphabetic  acrostic.  Some  emendation 
is  necessary,  especially  in  11-15,  where  the  present  text  requires  "thee" 
to  stand  for  Judah  and  Assyria  alternately  in  a  most  impossible  fashion. 

ii.,  iii.,  Description  of  the  siege  and  sack  of  Nineveh. 
ii.  2  is  either  a  gloss  or  should  be  taken  with  i. 

(d)  Significance, — Nahum,  like  Habakkuk,  is  remarkable 
for  the  absence  of  any  reference  to  the  sin  of  Judah.  Judah, 
the  righteous  sufferer,  is  contrasted  with  its  wicked  oppressor. 
This  attitude  may  be  due  to  the  Deuteronomic  reformation,  or 
Nahum  and  Habakkuk  may  represent  a  school  of  prophets 
in  partial  opposition  to  Jeremiah  and  the  main  line  of 
prophecy. 

Nahum  is  not  quoted  in  N.T. 

9.  Habakkuk. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — Nothing  is  known  of  Habakkuk, 
except  what  may  be  gathered  from  this  book. 

The  LXX.  ascription  of  "Bel  and  the  Dragon"  to  Habakkuk;  the 
account  in  "Bel,  etc.,"  of  an  angel  carrying  Habakkuk  by  his  hair  from 
Judah  to  Babylon,  to  give  his  dinner  to  Daniel  in  the  lion's  den ;  and  the 
information  given  by  Epiphanius,  are  unhistorical.  The  statement  that 
Habakkuk  was  a  Levite  is  a  deduction  from  the  presence  in  the  book  of  a 
Psalm  with  the  musical  directions  of  the  Levitical  choir. 

The  description  of  the  Chaldaeans^  shows  that  the  book 
was  written  when  they  were  a  prominent  power,  i.e.^  after  the 
revival  of  the  Chaldsean  empire  in  625,  and  before  the  Fall  of 
Babylon  in  536,  probably  before  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  in  586. 
The  exact  date  depends  on  the  interpretation  of  the  book.^  If 
the  oppressor  of  Israel  is  the  Assyrian,  the  date  would  be 
before  the  Fall  of  Nineveh,  c.  625-607  ;  if  the  Egyptian, 
between  Pharaoh  Necho's  victory  at  Megiddo  and  his  defeat 
at  Carchemish,  c.  606 ;  if  the  Chaldaean,  after  the  deportation 
of  Jehoiachin,  c.  597-586. 

Even  if  i.  5-1 1  is  omitted  (so  Nowack,  see  below)  there  is  still 
sufficient  ground  for  regarding  Habakkuk  as  a  contemporary  of  Jeremiah. 
The  book  reflects  the  conditions  of  the  closing  years  of  the  Jewish 
monarchy. 

*  Introd.  lo  Isaiah,  p.  ii2.  ^  i_  ^-\\.  '  See  below. 


252  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — Cf.  Jeremiah. 

(c)  Contents. — i.,  ii.,  The  Vindication  of  Judah  and  the 
Punishment  of  its  Oppressor. 

The  statement  of  contents  depends  upon  the  interpretation.  We  give 
the  three  main  views  with  an  analysis  according  to  each. 

(a)  Judah's  sin  will  be  punished  by  the  Chaldaeans,  who  in  their  turn 
will  be  punished.^ 

L  1-4,  Social  corruption  of  Judah,  in  which  the  righteous  Jew,  9addiq, 
is  oppressed  by  the  wicked  Jew,  rasha . 

5-1 1,  The  destructive  might  of  the  Chaldeans,  who  are  raised  up  to 
punish  the  wicked  Jews. 

12-17,  Appeal  to  Jehovah  against  the  unmeasured  cruelty  of  the 
Chaldaeans,  the  wicked,  rasha,  who  are  even  less  righteous,  jaddlq,  than 
the  Jews. 

ii.  1-4,  Deliverance  promised. 

5-20,  Woes  against  the  Chaldaeans  for  their  cruelty,  debauchery,  and 
idolatry. 

This  view  takes  the  text  just  as  it  stands,  but  involves  the  following 
difficulties:  The  "wicked"  is  in  one  place  a  portion  of  the  Jews,  in 
another,  the  Chaldteans  ;  i.  5-1 1  breaks  the  connection  ;  in  i.  6  the 
Chaldaeans  are  a  new  power  to  be  raised  up ;  in  ii.  5-20  the  oppressors 
are  spoken  of  as  well  known  and  of  long  standing. 

(/3)  Nothing  is  said  of  the  sin  of  Judah ;  the  prophet  dwells  on  the 
wrongs  done  to  Judah  and  other  nations  by  the  Chaldaeans,  and  announces 
the  coming  chastisement  of  the  oppressor,  i.  5-1 1  is  either  a  later 
addition,^  or  to  be  placed  before  i.   1-4.' 

[i.  5-1 1,  Chalda^an  oppression.] 

i.  1-4,  Social  disorder  in  Judah,  sufferings  of  the  righteous,  ^addiq, 
Jews,  at  the  hands  of  the  wicked,  rasha ,  Chaldaeans. 

5-1 1,  Interpolated  expansion  of  the  picture  of  Chaldaean  cruelty. 

12-17,  Appeal  against  the  wicked  Chaldaeans  on  behalf  of  the  righteous 
Jews. 

ii.  1-4,  Deliverance. 

5-20,  Woes  against  the  Chaldaeans. 

The  chief  objection  to  this  view  is  that  i.  5-1 1  neither  furnishes  a  suit- 
able exordium,  nor  seems  a  probable  interpolation. 

(7)  Nothing  is  said  of  the  sin  of  Judah,  the  prophet  dwells  on  the 
wrongs  inflicted  either  by  the  Assyrians'*  or  by  the  Egyptians.^  The 
oppressor  in  his  tiun  is  to  be  punished  by  the  Chaldaeans ;  i.  5-1 1  is  to  be 
placed  after  ii.  4. 

i.  1-4,  Sufferings  of  the  righteous  Jews  at  the  hands  of  the  wicked 
Assyrians  or  Egyptians. 

12-17,  Appeal  against  the  wicked  oppressor  on  behalf  of  the  righteous 
Jews. 

ii.  1-4,  Deliverance. 

i.  5-1 1,  Through  the  prowess  of  the  Chaldaeans. 

ii.  5-20,  Woes  against  the  oppressor,  Assyrian  or  Egyptian. 

1  So  Driver,  Davidson,  and  most  critics,        ^  Wellhausen,  etc. 
*  GiESEBRECHT,  etc.  *  BuDDE,  etc.  *  G.  A,  Smith. 


ZEPHANIAH  253 

The  chief  objections  to  this  view  are  the  difficulty  of  accounting  for  the 
transposition  of  i.  5-1 1 ;  and  the  absence  of  any  mention  of  the  Assyrians 
or  Egyptians.  The  part  or  whole  of  ii.  9-20  is  considered  by  Kuenen, 
eta,  not  to  be  Habakkuk's. 

iii.,  A  psalm  provided  with  heading,  "  Prayer  of  Habakkuk," 
etc.,  and  subscription  as  in  the  Psalter. 

iii.  2-15,  Theophany  in  which  Jehovah  delivers  His  anointed 
— the  people  Israel — from  the  wicked. 

16-19,  Expression  of  faith  in  the  depths  of  affliction. 

The  heading  and  subscription  suggest  that  iii.  was  taken  from  a  collec- 
tion of  Psalms,  and  that  the  ascription  to  Ilabakbuk  is  a  conjecture  of  an 
editor.  The  term  "anointed"  mdsMah  for  Israel  seems  post-exilic,  in 
pre-exilic  literature  mdshiah  is  the  actual  king.  Hence  Cheyne  and  others 
regard  iii.  as  post-exilic. 

(d)  Significance  and  use  in  N.T, — Habakkuk,  like  Nahum, 
emphasises  not  Judah's  sin,  but  the  contrast  between  righteous 
Judah  and  her  wicked  oppressor,  an  attitude  very  different 
from  that  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah.  In  iii.  17  f.  the  spirit  of 
trustful  acceptance  of  suffering  finds  its  supreme  expression  in 
"  Though  the  fig  tree  shall  not  blossom  ...  yet  will  I  rejoice 
in  Jehovah." 

Paul  in  Romans  i.  17  and  Galatians  iii.  11,  uses  ii.  4  in  the 
LXX.  form,  "  The  righteous  shall  live  by  faith ; "  the  Hebrew 
is  rather  "  by  faithfulness."  Cf.  also  Hebrews  x.  37,  38 ;  also 
i.  5  with  Acts  xiii.  41. 

10.  Zephaniah. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — The  opening  verse  describes  the 
book  as  *'  The  word  of  Jehovah  which  came  unto  Zephaniah, 
the  son  of  Cushi,  the  son  of  Gedaliah,  the  son  of  Amariah, 
the  son  of  Hezekiah,  in  the  days  of  Josiah,  the  son  of 
Amon,  king  of  Judah."  The  contents  confirm  this  statement, 
and  the  picture  of  social  and  religious  corruption  suggests  a 
date  before  the  reforms  of  Josiah,  /.^.,  639-621.  Probably 
Hezekiah  is  the  king,  and  the  genealogy  is  given  in  order  to 
introduce  the  name  of  this  distinguished  ancestor. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — The  efforts  of  Isaiah  and 
Hezekiah  for  purity  of  life  and  worship  were  followed  by 
a  reaction  under  Manasseh  and  Amon.     During  the  minority 


254  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

of  Josiah,  the  prophetic  party,  under  Zephaniah  and  his 
younger  contemporary,  Jeremiah,  were  gathering  strength  for 
a  new  movement,  which  culminated  in  the  reforms  of  Josiah. 
Abroad  the  Assyrian  empire  was  in  the  throes  of  dissolution, 
Egypt  was  not  formidable,  and  the  minor  Syrian  states  were 
left  to  their  own  devices.  Western  Asia,  however,  was  subject 
to  the  ravages  of  Scythian  hordes,  who  reached  the  frontiers 
of  Egypt. 

(c)  Co?ifents. — The  book  is  occupied  with  the  Doom  of 
Judah  and  Jerusalem  and  all  nations  in  the  Day  of  Jehovah. 

i.,  Judah  and  Jerusalem  are  punished  for  corrupt  worship,^ 
social  injustice,^  and  disbelief  in  a  living  God,  they  "say  in 
their  heart,  Jehovah  will  do  neither  good  nor  evil." 

ii..  Doom  of  Philistines,  Moab,  Ammon,  Ethiopians,  and 
Assyria. 

iii.  1-13,  Doom  of  Jerusalem  and  all  nations.  Deliverance 
of  a  purified  remnant,  "  a  humble  and  poor  people  "  in  Jeru- 
salem. 

iii.  9,  10  are  perhaps  a  later  addition.  Doubts  have  also  been  raised  as 
to  every  verse  in  ii.  and  iii.,  especially  ii.  8-1 1  (Moab  and  Ammon)  and 
iii.  8-20. 

iii.,  14-20,  A  post-exilic  lyric  in  the  style  of  Second  Isaiah, 

celebrating  the  restoration  of  the   exiles  to   Zion,  and  the 

Divine  Presence  in  their  midst. 

(d)  Significance. — Zephaniah  is  a  link  between  Isaiah  and 
Jeremiah.  In  the  gathering  of  the  nations  for  destruction,^ 
we  have  the  germ  of  the  apocalyptic  visions  of  later  prophets. 

There  is  no  quotation  from  Zephaniah  in  N.T. 

II.  Haggai. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — The  book  contains  four  utter- 
ances, each  separately  ascribed  to  Haggai,  and  dated  in  the 
second  year  of  Darius  (/>.,  Darius  I.,  Hystaspis),  b.c.  520; 
on  the  ist  of  the  sixth,  the  21st  of  the  seventh,  and  (the  last 
two)  on  the  24th  of  the  ninth  month,  i.e.^  about  September 
to  December.  Probably  they  were  committed  to  writing 
about  the  time  of  delivery.  The  book  frames  these  utter- 
1  i.  4-6.  2  i.  9.  3  iii.  8. 


HAGGAI  255 

ances  in  a  very  brief  narrative,  and  Haggai  is  spoken  of 
throughout  in  the  third  person;  it  may  have  been  compiled 
by  the  prophet  himself,  or  by  one  of  his  hearers.  In 
addition  to  the  facts  recorded  of  Haggai  in  this  book, 
Ezra  V.  i,  vi.  14  tell  us  that  he,  with  Zechariah,  persuaded  the 
Jews  to  rebuild  the  Temple. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — Sixteen  years  before,  after 
the  capture  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus,  many  Jews  returned^  to 
Judah,  and  settled  there  as  subjects  of  Persia,  under  the 
Davidic  Prince,  Zerubbabel,  and  the  High  Priest,  Joshua. 
They  were  harassed  by  hostile  neighbours,  who  induced 
Cyrus  to  forbid  the  building  of  the  Temple,  after  the 
foundations  had  been  laid.  The  recent  accession  of 
Darius  I.  held  out  prospects  of  a  change  of  the  Persian 
policy  in  Judah,  while  numerous  revolts  raised  hopes  of 
great  internal  changes  issuing  in  the  full  deliverance  of 
Israel. 

(c)  Contents. — The  First  Utterance,  i.  i-ii,  urged  them 
to  rebuild  the  Temple,  which  they  had  neglected  for  their 
own  houses.  A  recent  drought  had  been  sent  as  a  punish- 
ment. 

A  short  narrative,  i.  12-15,  tells  us  that  three  weeks  later 
the  Jews  under  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  set  to  work  on  the 
Temple. 

The  Second  Utterance,  ii.  1-9,  promises  that  the  new 
Temple,  enriched  with  the  wealth  of  the  Gentiles,  and  blessed 
with  peace,  shall  be  more  glorious  than  Solomon's. 

The  Third  Utterance,  ii.  10-19,  teaches  that  their  neglect 
of  the  Temple  tainted  and  blasted  all  their  life,  but  that  they 
will  be  blessed  for  their  new  zeal. 

The  Fourth  Utterance,  ii.  20-23,  announces  that,  in 
the  approaching  overthrow  of  the  nations  of  the  earth, 
Zerubbabel  will  be  the  favoured  and  protected  Servant  of 
Jehovah. 

(d)  Significance  and  Use  in  N.T. — The  new  energy  which 
Haggai  inspired  was  a  necessary  preliminary  to  the  work 

*  But  cf,  chapter  on  Chron.,  Ezra,  and  Neh. 


256  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  §  12,  must 
be  reckoned  amongst  the  founders  of  Judaism.  Hebrews 
xii.  26  quotes  ii.  6,  the  "shaking"  of  all  things. 

12.  The  Prophecies  of  Zechariah,  Zechariah  i.-viii. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — These  chapters  contain  a  series 
of  utterances,  each  separately  ascribed  to  Zechariah,  and 
dated  from  the  second  year  of  Darius  (/>.,  Darius  I., 
Hystaspis),  B.C.  520,  the  eighth  month,  about  August,  to  the 
fourth  year  of  Darius,  B.C.  518,  the  4th  day  of  the  ninth 
month,  about  September.  The  first  person  is  used  freely 
throughout,  and  all  the  evidence  shows  that  these  chapters 
were  composed  by  Zechariah  himself  soon  after  the  latest 
of  the  prophecies.  In  addition  to  the  facts  recorded  of 
Zechariah  here,  Ezra  v.  i,  vi.  14  tell  us  that  he,  with  Haggai, 
persuaded  the  Jews  to  rebuild  the  Temple. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances,  —  As  the  prophecies  of 
Zechariah  were  uttered  within  a  few  months  of  those  of 
Haggai,  the  historical  circumstances  are  substantially  the  same. 

(c)  Cofttents.  —  Second  Year  of  Darius,  eighth  month 
(August,  520). 

i.  1-6,  Appeal  to  the  fulfilment  of  ancient  prophecy. 

Second  Year  of  Darius,  eleventh  month,  24th  day  (Novem- 
ber, 520). 

i.  7-17,  Vision  of  Angelic  Horsemen,  who  report  that  the 
shaking  announced  in  Haggai  ii.  20-23  has  not  taken  place. 
Promise  of  great  prosperity  to  Jerusalem. 

i.  18-21,  Vision  of  Four  Smiths,  who  file  away  the  Four 
Horns,  which  had  scattered  Judah.  The  horns  and  smiths 
are  nations,  not  to  be  more  exactly  defined. 

ii.  1-5,  Vision  of  Man  with  Measuring-line,  forbidden  to 
draw  any  fixed  limits  for  the  future  city. 

ii.  6-13,  Exilic  Lyric  o?i  the  Restoration  of  the  Jews. 

The  situation  is  that  of  the  Exile  ;  the  ideas  and  style  resemble 
II.  Isaiah.  The  lyric  was  either  used  by  Zechariah  or  inserted  by  an 
editor,  as  a  suitable  expansion  of  the  teaching  of  the  preceding  vision. 

iii.,  Vision  of  the  High  Priest  accused  by  Satan,  but  puri- 


THE  PROPHECIES  OF  ZECHARIAH     257 

fied,  acquitted,  and  honoured  by  Jehovah.     The  Branch  or 
Messiah,  i.e.^  Zerubbabel. 

iv..  Vision  of  the  Seven  -  branched  Candlestick  supplied 
with  oil  from  the  Two  Olive  Trees,  symbolising  the  grace 
given  to  the  Jews  [?  through  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  to  build 
the  Temple]. 

iv.  6-10  internipts  the  context,  and  seems  to  belong  to  an  earlier 
stage  of  the  building  of  the  Temple  than  November,  520.  Probably 
an  earlier  utterance  of  Zechariah  placed  here,  at  or  after,  the  compilation 
of  the  book. 

v.  1-4,  Vision  of  the  Flying  Roll,  which  carries  a  destroying 
curse  to  sinners. 

v.  5-1 1,  Vision  of  Wickedness — as  a  Woman — shut  up 
in  an  ephah-measure,  carried  away  to  the  land  of  Shinar 
(Babylon). 

vi.  1-8,  Vision  of  the  Four  Chariots,  which  go  through  the 
earth  to  execute  God's  judgments. 

vi.  9-15,  The  Crowning  of  the  Messianic  Prince,  the 
Branch,  Zerubbabel. 

The  text,  as  it  stands,  refers  II-13  to  Joshua,  and  makes  him  **the 
Branch";  but  the  plural  "crowns,"  11,  and  the  "both,"  13  show 
that  two  persons  were  originally  referred  to.  The  "Branch"  elsewhere, 
Jeremiah  xxiii.  5,  6,  xxxiii.  15,  16,  is  a  Davidic  prince,  specially 
Zerubbabel,  Zechariah  iii.  8 ;  and  the  builder  of  the  Temple  is 
Zerubbabel,  Zechariah  iv.  Hence  the  text  has  been  reconstructed,  and 
is  translated,  G.  A.  Smith,  Twelve  Prophets^  ii.  308  and  note:  "Thou 
shalt  .  .  .  make  a  crown,  and  set  it  on  the  head  of  [Zerubbabel]  .  .  .  and 
he  shall  wear  the  royal  majesty  and  sit  and  rule  upon  his  throne,  and 
[Joshua]  shall  be  priest  on  his  right  hand,  and  there  will  be  a  counsel 
of  peace  between  the  two  of  them." 

This  utterance,  which  regards  the  building  of  the  Temple  as  still 
future,  is  probably  out  of  place  here,  and  was  delivered  before  the 
preceding  prophecies. 

Fourth  Year  of  Darius,  ninth  month,  4th  day  (September, 
518). 

vii.  1-7,  Shall  fasts  continue?     Unreal  fasts. 

vii.  8-14,  The  former  ruin  of  Israel  the  punishment  of 
oppression. 

viii.  1-17,  The  future  happiness  and  peace  of  Jerusalem. 

viii.  18-23,  The  abolition  of  fasts.  All  nations  shall 
worship  at  Jerusalem. 


258  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(d)  Significance  and  Use  in  N.T. — Zechariah  was  com- 
missioned to  enforce  the  lessons  and  continue  the  work 
of  the  older  prophets.  They  and  their  hearers  had  passed 
away,  but  the  Word  and  purpose  of  God  remained.^ 
Zechariah  has  reminiscences  of  his  predecessors;  his 
formula,  "And  he  said  unto  me,  What  seest  thou?  And 
I  said,"  is  found  in  Amos  vii.  8,  viii.  2,  Jeremiah  i.  11,  13; 
and  his  message,  "Execute  true  judgment,  and  show  mercy 
and  compassion  every  man  to  his  brother;  and  oppress  not 
the  widow,  nor  the  fatherless,  the  stranger,  nor  the  poor," 
is  an  echo  of  the  teaching  of  the  great  pre-exilic  prophets.^ 
But  in  Isaiah's  time  sacrifices  were  offered  as  a  substitute 
for  righteousness,  and  the  prophets  were  indifferent  to  or 
even  denounced  ritual  and  sanctuary.  Now  the  best  hopes 
for  social  righteousness  lay  in  devotion  to  the  Temple,  hence 
Zechariah  is  zealous  for  it  and  its  priesthood.  The  older 
prophets  had  announced  that  the  sin  of  Israel  must  be 
punished  by  the  overthrow  of  the  nation.  Zechariah  knows 
that  the  Jews  are  still  sinful,  but  this  sin  may  be  purged 
away  by  the  destruction  of  individuals,  by  the  removal  of 
wickedness  and  the  purification  of  the  people.^  The  ancient 
hope  of  deliverance  through  the  house  of  David  revived 
and  fastened  itself  on  Zerubbabel;*  this  Messianic  hope 
connects  itself,  as  of  old,  with  victory  over  the  Gentiles, 
but  also  with  the  homage  of  the  Gentiles  to  Jehovah  at 
Jerusalem,^  which  shall  be  "the  city  of  truth"  and  the 
temple  hill  "  the  holy  mountain  " ;  and  "  there  shall  sit  in 
the  streets  of  Jerusalem  old  men  and  women,  each  with 
staff  in  hand  because  of  great  age;  and  the  streets  of 
the  city  shall  be  full  of  boys  and  girls  playing  in  the 
streets  thereof," <^  and  all  this  is  to  be  brought  about,  "Not 

1  i.  4-6,  vii.  7. 

2  Cf,  also  ii.  13  with  Zeph.  i.  7 ;  viii,  3  with  Isaiah  i.  26;  viii.  18-23 
with  Isaiah  ii.  1-4,  Micah  iv.  1-3. 

*  iii.,  v. 

*  See  above  on  vi.  11- 13. 
^  ii.  11-13,  viii.  18-23. 

*  viii.  4i  S- 


ZECHARIAH    IX.-XIV.  259 

by  might,  nor  by  power,  but  by  my  Spirit,  saith  Jehovah 
Sabaoth."  1 

In  Zechariah,  however,  Hebrew  prophecy  begins  to  lose 
its  sense  of  immediate  communion  with  God;  the  prophet 
receives  his  messages  through  visions  and  angels;  and  it  is 
Satan  who  denounces  the  sin  of  Israel,  symbolised  by  the 
filthy  garments  of  the  High  Priest. 

Zechariah  viii.  9-12  repeats  the  teaching  of  Haggai  i.  i-ii, 
ii.  15-19,  that  indifference  to  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple 
brought  calamity,  especially  failure  of  crops  and  vintage. 
The  unwelcome  peace  among  the  nations,  i.  11,  is  a  reference 
to  the  shaking  of  the  nations  in  the  interests  of  Israel  promised 
in  Haggai  ii.  6,  7,  21.  Another  parallel  with  post-exilic  litera- 
ture is  the  denunciation  of  the  sham  fast  in  vii.  5  as  compared 
with  Isaiah  Iviii.^ 

The  N.T.  contains  only  a  few  traces  of  these  chapters, 
chiefly  in  the  Apocalypse. 

13.  Zechariah  ix.-xiv. 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship. — Owing  to  the  accident  that 
Zechariah  xi.  13  is  quoted  in  Matthew  xxvii.  9  as  from 
Jeremiah,  criticism  early  ^  suggested  that  these  chapters  were 
not  the  work  of  Zechariah.  Apart  from  this,  there  are  many 
striking  differences  between  the  two  parts  of  the  book,  which 
show  that  they  are  not  by  the  same  author. 

In  i.-viii.,  the  sections  have  headings  specifying  the  date 
and  author — Zechariah  ;  Zechariah  speaks  in  the  first  person  ; 
almost  every  paragraph  has  numerous  points  of  contact  with 
B.C.  520-518.  There  are  many  visions,  in  which  angels  play 
an  important  part. 

In  ix.-xiv.,  either  there  are  no  headings,  or,  if  there  are, 
they  are  silent  as  to  date  and  authorship ;  the  author  rarely 
speaks  in  the  first  person.     Where  he  does,  it  is  not,  as  in  the 

*  iv.  6,  cf.  Isaiah  xxxi.  3,  **  The  Egyptians  are  men,  and  not  God ;  and 
their  horses  flesh,  and  not  spirit." 
2  Dated  by  Cheyne,  b.c.  450-444. 
»  Joseph  Mede,  1632. 


26o  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

first  part,  in  his  own,  but  in  some  symbolic  character,  e.g.,  the 
Good  Shepherd ;  there  are  no  points  of  contact  with  B.C. 
520-518,  but  rather  with  other  periods  (see  below);  there 
are  neither  visions  nor  angels. 

There  are  also  diversities  of  vocabulary,  style,  and  ideas. 

Criticism  started  with  an  attempt  to  ascribe  these  chapters 
to  Jeremiah;  i.e.,  also  to  assign  them  to  the  period  B.C. 
626-586.  They  are  certainly  not  by  Jeremiah,  nor  do  they 
belong  to  his  period,  but  some  critics  still  regard  them  as  pre- 
exilic.  Ephraim,  ix.  10,  Assyria,  x.  10,  Damascus,  ix.  i,  and 
Hamath,  ix.  2,  are  spoken  of  as  in  existence,  which  seems  to 
imply  a  date  before  the  Fall  of  Samaria,  B.C.  722.  The  carry- 
ing away  of  captives  from  Gilead,  x.  10,  has  been  connected 
with  the  captivity  of  Gilead  by  Tiglath-Pileser,  ii.  Kings  xv. 
29.  The  "  three  shepherds  cut  off  in  one  month,"  Zechariah 
xi.  8,  have  been  explained  of  ii.  Kings  xv.  13-15,  where 
Zechariah  and  Shallum  perish  in  a  short  time,  the  ^kird 
shepherd  being  some  unknown  pretender.  The  necessity  for 
this  sheer  conjecture  shows  that  there  is  no  real  connection 
between  the  two  passages.  On  these  and  similar  grounds  the 
whole  or  part  of  ix.-xi.  with  xiii.  7-9  are  sometimes  referred 
to  the  last  days  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel ;  and  xii.-xiv.  (less 
xiii.  7-9)  to  the  last  days  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  for  the 
mourning  in  xii.  1 1  is  often  understood  of  the  mourning  for 
Josiah,  ii.  Chronicles  xxxv.  24,  25. 

But,  on  the  whole,  a  closer  examination  of  this  appendix 
shows  that  both  sections  are  post-exilic,  at  any  rate  in  their 
present  form.  In  ix.  13,  Greece  is  mentioned  as  the  great 
enemy  of  the  Jews,  and  the  Greeks  first  became  a  great 
neighbouring  power  after  the  conquests  of  Alexander,  B.C.  333. 
The  idea  of  the  Messianic  King  as  Prince  of  Peace,  ix.  9, 
would  be  very  remarkable  in  a  pre-exiUc  work  dealing  with 
the  impending  ruin  of  Israel  and  Judah.  The  idea  is  even 
more  developed  than  in  Isaiah  x.  6,  often  regarded  as  post- 
exilic. 

From  xii.  onward,  the  marks  of  post-exilic  authorship  are 
numerous  and  convincing.     In  xii.  i  Israel  stands  for  Judah ; 


ZECHARIAH    IX.-XIV.  261 

the  importance  given  to  "  the  house  of  Levi "  by  being  placed 
side  by  side  with  "the  house  of  David,"  xii.  12,  13,  reminds 
us  of  the  exalted  position  of  the  priesthood  after  the  exile; 
the  utter  contempt  poured  upon  prophecy,  xiii.  2-6,  suggests 
a  late  period  when  genuine  prophets  had  ceased  to  appear; 
xiv.  is  an  apocalypse  of  an  advanced  type;  the  importance 
attached  to  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  xiv.  16,  to  the  sanctity 
of  pots  and  bells,  xiv,  20,  21,  to  the  absence  of  foreigners 
from  the  Temple,  xiv.  21,  and  the  universal  observance  of 
Jewish  feasts  by  Gentiles,  point  to  the  ritual  of  the  post-exilic 
period. 

Hence  ix.-xiv.  is,  as  a  whole,  post-exilic.  The  reference  to 
Greece,  ix.  13,  points  to  a  date  in  the  Greek  period,  after 
B.C.  333,  for  at  any  rate  a  part  of  the  chapters.  Some,  how- 
ever, obtain  an  earlier  date  by  attributing  this  reference  to  an 
editor. 

Thus  the  appendix  belongs  either  to  the  Persian  or  Greek 
period,  but  its  exact  date  or  dates  cannot  be  certainly  fixed ; 
nor  can  we  be  sure  whether  ix.-xi.  with  xiii.  7-9,  and 
xii.-xiv.  (less  xiii.  7-9)  are  by  the  same  or  by  two  different 
authors. 

Hence  Ephraim  and  Joseph  are  only  used  in  a  quasi- 
symbolic  sense,  Judah  and  the  restored  Jews  claim  to  re- 
present Ephraim  and  Joseph,  just  as  they  appropriate  the  term 
Israel.  Assyria  is  either  used  as  a  geographical  term,  or 
applied  to  the  Greek  kingdom  of  Syria.  The  later  applica- 
tion was  very  natural,  seeing  that  "  Syria  "  is  simply  a  Greek 
contraction  for  "Assyria."  These  usages  can  be  paralleled 
from  Ezra  vi.  22,  Judith  i.  i. 

Probably  the  appendix,  together  with  the  equally  anonymous 
"Malachi,"  was  placed,  because  of  its  anonymity,  at  the  end 
of  the  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets,  i.e.,  after  Zechariah ; 
and  thus  came  to  be  written  consecutively  with  Zechariah  and 
included  under  the  same  title. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstances. — For  Persian  period  see  §  11 
Haggai;  for  Greek  period  see  chapter  v.  §  10,  (b);  cj.  Contents 
below. 


262  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(c)  Confents.—lX.-Xl.  with  XIII.  7-9. 

ix.  1-8,  The  Temple  protected  when  Phoenicia  and  Philistia 
are  devastated.     A  remnant  of  the  Philistines  converted. 

ix.  9-17,  The  Messianic  King  brings  peace  and  prosperity 
to  Israel  by  giving  victory  over  the  Greeks. 

X.,  Victory  and  restoration  for  Judah  and  Ephraim. 

xi.,  with  xiii.  7-9,  In  a  time  of  calamity  the  people  were 
oppressed  by  their  rulers  or  "  shepherds  " ;  the  prophet  repre- 
senting Jehovah  "  cut  off  three  shepherds  in  one  month  "  and 
undertook  to  rule  the  people,  "feed  the  flock,"  with  two 
staves,  "  Grace "  and  "  Union,"  ^  symbolising  the  covenant 
of  Jehovah  with  man  and  the  union  of  Judah  and  Israel. 
But,  saith  the  prophet,  "  I  was  weary  of  them,  and  they  also 
loathed  me."  He  relinquished  his  task,  broke  his  staves,  and 
received  for  his  hire  thirty  shekels,  the  price  of  a  slave,  which 
he  cast  into  the  Temple  treasury.^  Then  Jehovah  delivers 
over  His  people  to  a  good-for-nothing ^  shepherd,  who  neglects 
and  devours  the  flock,  and  is  punished.  Then  the  prophet, 
"  my  shepherd,  the  man  that  is  my  fellow,  saith  Jehovah 
Sabaoth,"  is  slain  and  the  flock  scattered ;  finally,  a  third 
part  of  the  people  are  purified  and  reconciled  to  God. 

The  action  is  symbolic,  the  prophet  representing  in  turn 
very  different  actors  in  an  apocalyptic  drama,  first  Jehovah, 
then  the  worthless  shepherd,  then  the  faithful  shepherd  who 
is  martyred. 

XIL  i-XIII.  6,  XIV. 

xii.  i-xiii.  6,  Siege  of  Jerusalem  by  Gentiles  allied  with 
Judah;  the  assailants  are  discomfited,  Judah  is  reconciled 
to  Jerusalem ;  both  are  delivered,  Judah  firsts  that  Jerusalem 
may  not  be  puffed  up.  The  city  mourns  for  a  martyr,  whom 
it  has  put  to  death ;  and  is  purified  by  a  fountain  opened  for 

1  So  G.  A.  Smith,  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets;  A.V.,  R.V. 
** Beauty,"  "Bands." 

2  In  xi.  13  read  "treasury"  V^arfor  ''^oiitx" ydfer  with  G.  A.  Smith, 
etc. 

8  A.V.  "idol,"  R.V.,  G.  A.  Smith,  "worthless,"  xi.  17. 


ZECHARIAH    IX.-XIV.  263 

sin  and  uncleanness,  and  by  the  cutting  off  of  idols,  prophets, 
and  the  unclean  spirit. 

xiv.,  Another  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Gentiles ;  the  city 
is  actually  taken  and  sacked,  when  Jehovah  appears  upon  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  which  splits  asunder,  and  the  Jews  escape 
through  the  chasm.  Living  waters  flow  east  and  west  from 
the  city,  and  the  rest  of  the  land  becomes  a  plain.  The 
besiegers  are  destroyed.  The  remnant  of  the  Gentiles  shall 
go  up  every  year  to  worship  Jehovah  at  the  feast  of  Taber- 
nacles, and  if  they  neglect  will  be  punished  with  plagues. 
Everything  in  Jerusalem,  down  to  the  pots,  shall  be  holy. 

If  we  translate  with  R.V.  text,  "Judah  also  shall  fight  against 
Jerusalem,"  we  must  suppose  that  verses  13  and  14.  which  in  any  case 
interrupt  the  context,  have  either  been  transferred  here  from  the  beginning 
of  xii.,  or  have  been  added  by  an  editor  to  connect  xiv.  and  xii.,  cf.  G.  A. 
Smith,  i.  1.  Driver  takes  the  rendering  of  R.V.Mg.,  *' Judah  shall  fight 
at  Jerusalem,"  but  even  this  is  quite  alien  to  the  context. 

(d)  Significance  and  Use  in  O.T. — In  Zechariah  ix.-xiv. 
passages  of  ancient  prophecy  may  be  embedded,  but 
we  are  mostly  in  the  region  of  the  apocalyptic  visions  of 
later  Judaism.  In  the  picture  of  the  future,  Judah  and 
Jerusalem,  and  the  Temple,  the  circumstances  of  the  writer's 
own  time,  are  strangely  blended  with  vast  armies  of  all  nations 
attacking  the  Holy  City,  with  supernatural  plagues  and  trans- 
formations of  mountain  and  rivers,  with  vague  symbolism  of 
shepherds,  and  with  the  phantoms  of  dead  peoples  and 
empires,  Ephraim  and  Assyria.  This  confusion  of  symbols 
from  all  sources  makes  it  difficult  to  discover  any  certain 
indications  of  the  actual  conditions  of  the  author  and  his 
times.  The  martyr  of  xii.  10  and  perhaps  also  of  xiii,  7 
did  not  necessarily  belong  to  the  ^  author's  own  time,  but 
may  have  been  someone  whose  death  burdened  the  con- 
science of  Israel  for  many  generations ;  perhaps  the  innocent 
sufferer  whose  fate  suggested  Isaiah  liii. 

Yet  xii.  2,  7,  xiv.  14  indicate  a  time  of  estrangement 
between  Jerusalem  and  the  house  of  David  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  rest  of  Judah  on  the   other,   and  xiii.   1-6 


264  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

shows  the  prophetic  order  in  the  last  stage  of  decay ;  the 
"  wounds  "  in  6  were  perhaps  self-mutilations  connected  with 
superstitious  ritual. 

The  Messianic  pictures  become  more  detailed  and  ex- 
plicit. The  post-exilic  type  of  saint  was  the  humble,  pious, 
God-fearing  man,  the  ^d?it ;  so,  ix.  9,  the  King  comes  to 
Zion  "  vindicated  and  victorious,  meek  and  riding  upon  an 
ass."i     In  xii.  8,  "The  house  of  David  shall  be  as  God." 

The  overthrow  of  the  Gentiles  and  their  homage  to  Jehovah 
are  still  dwelt  on,  but  with  the  grimness  of  apocalypse;  the 
heathen  hosts  moulder  into  rottenness  as  they  stand ;  the 
survivors  are  compelled  by  dread  of  drought  to  be  regular 
attendants  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  xiv.  12-19. 

Finally  the  ethical  zeal  for  righteousness  connects  itself, 
after  the  manner  of  the  Pharisees,  with  the  ceremonial  clean- 
ness of  material  objects,  bells,  bowls,  and  pots,  xiv.  21. 

The  clause  in  xii.  i,  "Jehovah  which  stretcheth  forth  the 
heavens,  and  layeth  the  foundation  of  the  earth,"  is  a  favourite 
formula  of  II.  Isaiah.^  The  fountain  opened  for  uncleanness, 
the  streams  issuing  from  Jerusalem,  and  the  transformation  of 
the  land,  are  based  upon  similar  pictures  in  Ezekiel.^ 

The  picture  of  the  Meek  King,  ix.  9,  riding  on  the  ass, 
is  applied  to  Christ  entering  Jerusalem,  Matthew  xxi.  5, 
John  xii.  15.  The  thirty  pieces  of  silver  thrown  to  the 
potter,  xi.  13,  are  applied  to  Judas'  thirty  pieces  given  for 
the  potter's  field,  Matthew  xxvi.  15,  xxvii.  9,  10.  Cf.  also 
xii.  10,  "They  shall  look  unto  me  whom  they  have  pierced," 
with  John  xix.  37;  and  xiii.  7,  "I  will  smite  the  shepherd," 
etc.,  with  Matthew  xxvi.  31,  Mark  xiv.  27. 

14.  MalachL 

(a)  Date  and  Authorship,  —  The  book  is  anonymous. 
"Malachi,"  which  means  "my  messenger"  or  "my  angel," 

1  So  G.  A.  Smith  ;  R.V.,  "just  and  having  salvation ;  lowly,"  etc. 

2  xl.  22,  xlii.  5,  etc. 

3  xxxvi.  25,  xlvii.  1-12,  cfi  Joel  iii.  18. 


MALACHI  265 

is  a  title  prefixed  by  an  editor,  to  whom  it  was  suggested 
by  the  "my  messenger"  of  iii.   i.^ 

The  book  is  clearly  connected  with  the  reforms  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah,  b.c.  458-433.  Two  main  features  of  those 
reforms  were  the  provision  for  the  maintenance  of  the  services 
of  the  Temple,  and  the  prohibition  of  marriages  with 
foreigners;  and  the  Book  of  Malachi  is  devoted  to  the 
advocacy  of  these  two  objects.  Opinion  is  divided  as  to 
the  exact  date.  The  book  may  have  been  issued  before 
the  first  arrival  of  Nehemiah,  b.g  458,  or  before  the 
promulgation  of  the  Priestly  Code  in  B.C.  444,  and  may 
thus  have  prepared  the  way  for  the  reforms ;  or  it  may 
have  been  issued  after  B.C.  444,  or  even  after  Nehemiah's 
final  departure  from  Judah,  some  time  after  B.C.  433,  and 
may  have  served  to  overcome  the  reluctance  of  the  Jews 
to  fully  accept  and  maintain  the  new  dispensation.  The 
fact  that  the  book  has  points  of  contact  with  Deuteronomy, 
Ezekiel,  and  the  Law  of  Holiness,^  rather  than  with  the 
later  portions  of  the  Priestly  Code,  points  to  a  date  previous 
to  the  promulgation  of  the  latter. 

(b)  Historical  Circumstafices. — Malachi  falls  in  a  part  of 
the  Persian  period,  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus, 
464-424,  when  the  Persian  government  was  favourably  dis- 
posed to  the  Jews.  Before  the  first  arrival  of  Nehemiah, 
however,  the  condition  of  Judaea  was  very  unsatisfactory. 
The  Temple  had  been  completed,  but  its  completion  had 
not  been  followed  by  the  prosperity  promised  by  Haggai 
and  Zechariah;  people  and  priests  alike  were  careless  about 
the  services,  and  entangled  in  marriages  and  other  relations 
with  heathen  and  half  heathen  neighbours ;  there  was  danger 
lest  the  worship  of  Jehovah  should  be  degraded  to  the  level 

1  maliakkt;  the  word  in  i.  i  is  taken  as  a  title  by  the  LXX.,  which, 
however,    read    maie'dkhS,    "his    messenger,"  and   by  the    Targum  of 

Jonathan.     This  view  was  adopted  by  Calvin,   who  has  been  followed 
y  most  recent  critics.     Some,  however,  still  regard  Malachi  as  a  proper 
name.     Cf.,  however,  the  designation  of  Haggai  as  the  "  messenger"  of 
Jehovah  in  Haggai  i.  13. 
'  Lev.  xvii.-xxvi. 


266  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

of  heathen  religions,  and  confused  and  blended  with  the 
worship  of  other  gods.  These  dangers  were  averted  by 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Nehemiah  used  his  authority,  as  the 
representative  of  the  Persian  King,  to  establish  the  Priestly 
Code  as  the  Law  of  the  Jews,  to  put  an  end  to  marriages 
with  foreigners,  to  make  a  sharp  and  permanent  division 
between  the  Jewish  community  and  its  neighbours,  and  to 
make  adequate  provision  for  the  Temple  services. 

(c)  Contents. — i.  1-5,  Edom's  ruin  a  proof  of  Jehovah's  love 
to  Israel. 

i.  6-ii.  9,  Neglect  of  the  Temple  services  by  priests  and 
people. 

ii.  10-16,  Jewish  wives  divorced  to  make  room  for  foreign 
women. 

Verses  ii,  12  break  the  connection,  and  may  be  a  later  addition ;  see 
G.  A.  Smith,  i.  1. 

ii.  ly-iii.  6,  The  sudden  coming  of  Jehovah's  messenger  to 
purify  priests  and  people. 

iii.  7-12,  Fertihty  will  reward  the  due  payment  of  tithes  and 
offerings. 

iii.  13-iv.  3,  Prosperous  sinners  will  come  to  ruin,  and 
suffering  saints  will  be  delivered. 

iv.  4-6,  Elijah  the  Forerunner. 

(d)  Significance  and  Use  in  N,T, — The  form  of  the  book 
is  an  argument  against  those  who  are  prepared  to  justify 
themselves,  e.g.^  "  Ye  have  wearied  Jehovah  with  your  words. 
Yet  ye  say.  Wherein  have  we  wearied  Him?"^  It  is  a 
manifesto  on  behalf  of  earnest  and  pious  Jews  alike  against 
the  self-satisfied  indifference  to  true  religion  of  the  ruling 
classes,  the  priests  and  the  people  generally,  and  against 
the  despondency  of  those  who  thought  that  the  prosperity 
of  wicked  oppressors  showed  that  God  had  deserted  His 
own  cause  and  those  who  were  faithful  to  it.^  Here,  as  in 
Haggai  and  Zechariah,  zeal  for  holiness  and  righteousness 
goes  hand  in  hand  with  zeal  for  the  Temple.     The  devotion 

^  ii.  17.  '  iii.  13-iv.  3. 


MALACHI  267 

and  enthusiasm  of  the  party  represented  by  this  book  made 
the  reforms  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  possible. 

Two  details  may  be  noticed.  The  Davidic  Messiah  does 
not  appear ;  but  a  messenger,  a  new  Elijah,  is  announced,  who 
shall  prepare  the  way  for  Jehovah  and  His  Day  of  Judgment. 
In  a  most  remarkable  passage  the  writer  seems  to  recognise 
the  Gentile  worship  of  their  gods  as  worship  paid  to  Jehovah, 
"  For  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  even  unto  the  going  down  of 
the  same  my  name  is  great  among  the  Gentiles ;  and  in  every 
place  incense  is  offered  unto  my  name,  and  a  pure  offering; 
for  my  name  is  great  among  the  Gentiles."  ^ 

In  the  New  Testament,  St.  Paul  uses  i.  2  to  illustrate  the 
doctrine  of  divine  election  2 ;  and  the  prediction  of  Elijah  the 
Forerunner  is  applied  to  John  the  Baptist.^ 

In  Mark  i.  2  a  quotation  from  Malachi  iii.  i  is  included  in  a 
quotation  from  "  Isaiah  the  prophet." 

M.  II  R.V.  Text.  2  Rom.  ix.  13. 

"  Matt.  xvi.  14,  xvii.  1-13,  Mark  i.  2-4,  etc. 


CHAPTER  VIL 

APOCRYPHA,  PSEUDEPIGRAPHA,  AND 

SOME  OTHER  JEWISH  LITERATURE  NOT 

INCLUDED    IN    THE  PROTESTANT  CANON  ^ 


I. 

Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  includ- 

13. 

Josephus. 

ing  Epistle  of  Baruch. 

14- 

Jubilees,  Book  of. 

2. 

Ascension  of  Isaiah. 

15- 

Judith. 

3- 

Assumption  of  Moses. 

16. 

i.  Maccabees. 

4- 

Baruch,  Book  of. 

17. 

ii.  Maccabees. 

5- 

Daniel,   Song  of    the 

Three 

18. 

iii,  Maccabees. 

Children,      Bel      and 

the 

19. 

iv.  Maccabees. 

Dragon,    Susanna. 

20. 

Manasseh,  Prayer  of. 

6. 

Ecclesiasticus. 

21. 

Philo. 

7- 

Enoch,  Book  of. 

22. 

Psalms  of  Solomon. 

8. 

Enoch,  Book  of  the  Secrets  of. 

23. 

Sibyllines. 

9- 

I.  or  III.  Esdras. 

24. 

Testament    of     the 

10. 

II.  or  IV.  F^dras. 

Patriarchs. 

II. 

Esther. 

25- 

Tobit. 

12. 

Jeremiah,  Letter  of. 

26. 

Wisdom  of  Solomon. 

Twelve 


1.  Apocal3rpse  of  Baruch. — Extant  in  Syriac  version  of 
Greek  version  of  the  original  Hebrew ;  written  by  unknown 
Pharisaic  authors,  c.  a.d.  70-130.  Apocalypse  of  the  history 
from  the  time  of  Baruch  to  the  Last  Days,  and  the  Reign  of 
Messiah,  put  into  the  mouth  of  Baruch.  It  has  much  in 
common  with  ii.  or  iv.  Esdras,  and  includes  what  was  known 
as  the  Epistle  of  Baruch. 

2.  Ascension  of  Isaiah. — Extant  in  Latin  and  Ethiopian 
versions  of  the  original  Greek,  consists  of  a  Jewish,  possibly 
pre-Christian  account  of  the  sawing  asunder  of  Isaiah,  with 

^  Cf.  Chapter  I.  §  4  on  the  Canon. 
268 


APOCRYPHA  269 

Christian  additions,  containing  Isaiah's  vision  of  the  Seven 
Heavens,  with  a  prologue  and  epilogue.  The  combination 
may  be  dated  c.  a.d.  100. 

3.  Assumption  of  Moses.  —  Extant  in  Latin  version  of 
Greek  version  of  Aramaic  or  Hebrew  (Charles)  original, 
written  by  a  Zealot  or  Pharisee,  c.  a.d.  1-50.  Only  part  is 
extant,  viz.,  an  Apocalypse  of  the  history  from  the  time  of 
Moses  to  the  Last  Days,  when  Jehovah  shall  manifest  Him- 
self to  restore  the  theocracy.  The  lost  portion,  only  known 
from  the  Fathers,  contained  an  account  of  the  end  of  Moses, 
and  was  Jude's  ^  authority  for  the  dispute  over  the  body  of 
Moses. 

4.  Baruch,   Book   of. — Extant  in   LXX.   and    dependent 

versions.     A  combination  of  at  least  two  independent  works, 

(a)  i.-iii.  8,  Confession  of  the  sins  which  led  to  the  Captivity, 

with  historical  introduction,  apparently  dependent  on  Daniel 

ix.,  or  vice  versa^  written  in  Hebrew,  assigned  to  various  dates 

from  B.C.  320  to  A.D.  70.     (b)  iii.  9-v.,  Praise  of  Wisdom,  and 

Consolations  for  the  Exiles,  written  in  Greek  after  a.d.  70. 

Marshall,  Hastings^  Bible  Dictionary^  holds  that  iii.  9-iv.  4,  the  Praise 
of  Wisdom,  was  written  in  Aramaic. 

5.  Daniel,  the  Song  of  the  Three  Children,  Bel  and  the 
Dragon,  Susanna. — The  Greek  Daniel  contains  these  three 
and  other  additions.  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  and  Susanna  in 
many  MSS.  and  editions  of  the  LXX.  are  given  separately. 
The  Dragon  story  of  the  former,  and  the  Sotig  exist  in 
Aramaic,  otherwise  these  three  additions  are  only  found  in 
Greek,  in  which  language  they  were  probably  composed,  the 
Aramaic  being  not  the  original  but  a  translation.  In  LXX., 
Bel  and  the  Dragon  bears  the  title,  "  From  the  prophecy  of 
Ambakoum  (Habakkuk),  Son  of  Jesus,  of  the  tribe  of  Levi." 
These  additions  may  be  dated  between  B.C.  160  and  the 
Christian  Era. 

6.  Ecclesiasticus  or  Wisdom  of  Jesus  ben  Sirach. — Extant, 
as  a  whole,  in  LXX.  and  allied  versions,  of  a  Hebrew  original, 

^  Verse  9. 


270  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

of  which  xxxix.  15-xlix.  11,  and  other  portions,  have  been 
recently  discovered.  Composed  about  B.C.  180  by  Jesus  ben 
Sirach,  and  translated  into  Greek  by  his  grandson  about 
B.C.  130.     A  second  and  larger  Book  of  Proverbs. 

7.  Enoch,  Book  of. — Extant  entire  in  Ethiopic  version ;  in 
part,  in  Greek  version  of  Hebrew  or  Aramaic  original.  Con- 
sists of  five  books,  which  may  be  five  separate  works,  the 
second  is  certainly  by  a  different  hand  from  the  rest.  The 
second  book,  a  Vision  of  Heaven  and  Hell,  and  of  the 
Judgment  by  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  Man,  variously  dated 
from  B.C.  95  to  A.D.  70.^  The  rest  contains  the  Fall  of  the 
Angels,  Enoch's  Journeys  through  earth  and  heaven,  a 
Treatise  on  Astronomy,  two  Visions  of  the  Flood,  and  two 
Apocalypses  of  the  history  from  Adam  to  the  establishment 
of  Messiah's  kingdom,  and  is  variously  dated  from  B.C.  160 
to  B.C.  105.  It  is  quoted  as  Scripture  in  Jude  14  f.  (?)  and 
Barnabas  iv.  3,  xvi.  5. 

8.  Enoch,  Book  of  the  Secrets  of. — Extant  in  a  Slavonic 
version,  made  known  to  Western  Europe  for  the  first  time 
in  1896,  by  the  translation  of  W.  R.  Morfill,  edited  with 
Introduction  and  Notes  by  R.  H.  Charles.  According  to 
Mr.  Charles,  this  book  was  written  in  Egypt,  in  Greek, 
A.D.  1-50,  but  embodies  fragments  of  an  older  Hebrew 
work.  It  contains  Enoch's  journey  through  the  Seven 
Heavens;  God's  description  to  Enoch  of  the  Creation,  the 
Fall  of  the  Angels,  the  Fall  of  Adam ;  Enoch's  Translation, 
and  his  temporary  return  to  instruct  his  sons.  In  spite  of  its 
similarity  to  the  Book  of  Enoch,  it  is  a  distinct  work. 

9.  I.  Esdras  (E.  V.  and  LXXP)  or  III.  Esdras  ( Vulg.,  Sixth 
Article,  ajid  early  English  Bibles) ;  often  the  Greek  Esdras.— 
A  Greek  edition  of  Ezra  (order  of  sections  altered),  ii. 
Chronicles  xxxv.  f.  (Josiah-Zedekiah),  Nehemiah  vii.  73- 
viii.  13  (Promulgation  of  the  Law),  with  an  original  section, 
iii.  i-v.  6,  describing  Zerubbabel's  victory  in  a  contest  of  wit 

1  Konig,  Cornill,  etc.  regard  this  section  as  a  Christian  document. 
*  Esdras  A,  but  in  Lagarde,  Luc,  Text,  Esdras  B. 


JOSEPHUS  271 

before  Darius,  and  its  reward  in  the  Return  of  the  Jews. 
Either  compiled  from  the  Greek  of  the  LXX.,  or  by  a 
Greek  writer  who  translated  freely  from  the  Hebrew; 
iii.  i-v.  6,  in  any  case,  composed  in  Greek.  Used  by 
Josephus,  and  may  be  dated  B.C.  170-100. 

10.  II.  Esdras  (Eng.  Apoc),  or  IV.  Esdras  (Vulg.).i— 
Extant  in  Latin,  Syriac,  Ethiopic,  Armenian,  and  Arabic 
versions  of  a  Greek  original.  The  original  work,  iii.-xiv., 
is  closely  connected  with  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  and 
was  perhaps  known  as  the  Apocalypse  of  Ezra;  it  was 
written  by  a  Palestinian  Jew,  c.  a.d.  &1-96,  and  contains 
discourses  and  visions  given  to  Ezra  by  an  angel,  and  an 
account  of  the  rewriting  of  the  O.T.  by  Ezra.  Some  of 
the  visions  are  symbolic  apocalyptic  statements  of  history, 
in  the  manner  of  Daniel  and  Revelation.  Chapters  i.  f., 
XV.  f.  are  much  later  additions  of  little  interest. 

11.  Esther. — The  Greek  Esther  contains  a  speech  and 
prayer  of  Mordecai,  two  letters  of  Artaxerxes  to  the 
provinces,  a  prayer  of  Esther  and  other  additions,  not 
found  in  the  Hebrew,  which  were  composed  in  Greek, 
c.  B.C.  300-100. 

12.  Jeremiah,  Letter  of. — In  many  MSS.  of  LXX.,  and 

in  Vulg.  and  English  Apocrypha  given  as  Baruch  vi.  A 
polemic  against  idolatry,  purporting  to  be  a  letter  from 
Jeremiah  to  the  exiles  at  Babylon,  cf,  Jeremiah  xxix.  10, 
written  in  Greek,  c.  B.C.  200 — Christian  Era. 

13.  Josephus. — Born  a.d.  37,  died  c.  103,  a  Jewish  priest, 
who  commanded  the  forces  in  Galilee  during  the  revolt,  but 
was  taken  prisoner  by  the  Romans,  and  became  a  protegh 
of  Titus.  Besides  an  autobiography,  works  On  the  Jewish 
War^  and  Against  Apion^  he  wrote,  in  a.d.  95,  the  Antiquities^ 
a  history  of  the  Jews  from  the  Creation  to  the  outbreak  of 

*  In  some  Latin  MSS.,  ii.  Esdr.  i.  f.  =ii.  Esdras,  ii.  Esdras  iii.- 
xiv.  =iv.  Esdras,  ii.  Esdras  xv.  f.  =v.  Esdras.  Thackeray,  art. 
"II.  Esdras,"  Hastings'  Bible  Dictionary. 


272  BIBLICAL    INTRODUCTION 

the  Jewish  War.  The  older  history  is  almost  entirely  derived 
from  the  O.T.,  and  adds  little  or  nothing  that  is  trustworthy. 
His  accounts  of  the  Jews  and  their  literature  were  intended 
to  make  as  favourable  an  impression  as  possible  upon  Gentile 
readers.  He  wrote  in  Greek,  also  in  Aramaic,  which  he  trans- 
lated into  Greek. 

14.  Jubilees,  Book  of,  or  Leptogenesis^  ^^  Little  Genesis^'^ 
etc. — Extant  in  an  Ethiopic  version  of  a  Greek  version  of  a 
Hebrew  or  Aramaic  original ;  fragments  of  a  Latin  version  also 
exist.  Written  towards  the  beginning  of  the  first  century  a.d. 
A  Midrash  ^  on  Genesis  i.-Exodus  xiv.,  arranged  according  to 
Jubilees,  or  periods  of  49  years.^  The  history  purports  to  have 
been  revealed  to  Moses  by  an  angel  during  his  stay  in  the  Mount. 

15.  Judith,  Book  of.— Extant  in  the  LXX.,  etc.  of  a 
Hebrew  or  Aramaic  original,  composed  by  a  Palestinian 
Jew,  c.  B.C.  150-100.  Narrates  how  Judith  delivered  the 
Jews  who  had  returned  from  the  Exile,  by  cutting  off  the 
head  of  Holofernes,  the  general  of  an  invading  army  sent 
by  Nebuchadnezzar,  King  of  Assyria, 

16.  L  Maccabees. — Extant  in  the  LXX.,  etc.  of  a  Hebrew 
Driginal,  composed  by  a  Palestinian  Jew,  c.  B.C.  100-70. 
A  most  valuable  history  of  the  Maccabees  from  the  accession 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  175,  to  the  murder  of  Simon,  135. 

1 7.  II.  Maccabees. — A  Greek  work,  preserved  in  the  LXX., 
variously  dated  from  B.C.  125  to  a.d.  70.  There  are  two 
introductory  letters,  containing  legends  about  Jeremiah,  etc. ; 
but  the  bulk  of  the  book  from  ii.  18  is  an  abridgement  of  an 
earlier  work  by  Jason  of  Cyrene,  c.  b.c.  150.  The  work  is  a 
history  of  the  Jews  from  the  accession  of  Seleucus  IV.,  187, 
to  the  death  of  Nicanor,  161.  It  is  very  inferior  as  history 
to  i.  Maccabees. 

18.  ni.  Maccabees. — A  Greek  work,  by  an  Egyptian  Jew, 
preserved  in  the  LXX.,  variously  dated  from  b.c.  ioo-a.d.  100. 

*  Edition  supplemented  by  illustrative  narratives,  etc. 
'  Not  50  as  ia  the  Pentateuch, 


SIBYLLINE   POEMS  273 

A  legend  of  the  miraculous  deliverance  of  the  Temple,  and 
also  of  Jewish  captives  at  Alexandria,  from  Ptolemy  IV.,  B.C. 
222-204.  Its  only  connection  with  the  Maccabees  is  the 
name  and  its  position  in  the  LXX. 

19.  IV.  Maccabees. — A  Greek  work,  preserved  in  the 
LXX.,  composed  c.  a.d.  30-70.  Uses  an  incident  from  ii. 
Maccabees  as  the  text  of  a  sermon  on  the  Supremacy  of 
Reason,  at  one  time  wrongly  ascribed  to  Josephus. 

20.  Manasseh,  Prayer  of. — A  Greek  work,  contained  in 
some  MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  variously  dated  from  B.C.  200  to  the 
beginning  of  the  Christian  Era  or  later.  Purports  to  be  the 
prayer  mentioned  II.  Chronicles  xxxiii.  18. 

21.  Philo. — Born  c,  B.C.  20,  died  after  a.d.  40.  A  Jewish 
philosopher  of  Alexandria,  who  sought  to  combine  and 
harmonise  the  teaching  of  the  Pentateuch  with  Greek  philo- 
sophy. He  wrote  in  Greek  a  long  series  of  works  which 
constitute  an  allegorising  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch, 
and  also  various  philosophical  treatises.  Some  of  them  are 
only  extant  in  Latin  translations. 

22.  Psalms  of  Solomon. — Eighteen  poems,  composed  in 
Hebrew  or-  Aramaic,  by  a  Palestinian  Jew,  partly  after 
Pompey's  capture  of  Jerusalem  in  b.c.  63,  partly  after  his 
death  in  B.C.  48^;  preserved  in  a  Greek  translation  in  some 
MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  but  not  included  in  the  Vulgate  or  the 
English  Apocrypha.  The  poems  are  partly  general  and 
didactic,  but  chiefly  consist  of  praise,  prayer,  and  lamenta- 
tion concerning  contemporary  events,  and  include  a  glowing 
description,  xvii.,  of  the  reign  of  Messiah. 

23.  Sibylline  Poems. — Numerous  poems,  purporting  to  be 
SibyUine  oracles,  circulated  in  the  Roman  empire;  many  of 
these  were  composed  by  Jews  and  Christians,  in  order  to 
propagate  their  own  doctrines   under  the  authority  of  the 

^  Both  events  are  referred  to  in  these  psalms  in  terms  which  imply  that 
they  were  recent.  The  language  is  symbolic,  and  gives  no  names,  but  the 
reference  to  Pompey's  death  is  quite  clear. 


274  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

ancient  Sibyl.  The  extant  twelve  books,  in  Greek,  are  a 
medley  of  Jewish  and  Christian  fragments  of  various  dates, 
in  which  are  embedded  some  relics  of  older  Gentile  poems. 
The  Jewish  portions — iii.  97-820,  written  under  Ptolemy  VII., 
c.  B.C.  140,  iii.  36-92,  c.  B.C.  40,  iv.  (probably  Jewish),  c.  a.d. 
80,  v.  (in  part),  first  century  a.d.,  xi.-xiv.,  much  later — contain 
polemics  against  polytheism  and  apocalyptic  visions  of  history, 
the  Day  of  Judgment,  and  the  world-wide  dominion  of  Israel 
and  the  Messiah. 

24.  Testament  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs. — A  Greek  work, 
composed  by  a  Jewish  Christian,  c.  a.d.  70-130,  perhaps  on 
the  basis  of  an  older  Jewish  work  in  Hebrew.  It  purports  to 
be  the  last  words  of  the  twelve  sons  of  Jacob.  Each  gives 
Midrashic^  history  of  himself,  a  discourse  on  some  moral 
topic,  such  as  Efwy  or  Simplicity^  and  apocalyptic  history 
and  prophecy. 

25.  Tobit,  Book  of. — A  Greek  work,  composed,  probably 
in  Assyria,  between  B.C.  200-20.  The  Hebrew  and  Aramaic 
editions  are  probably  versions  of  the  Greek.  A  religious 
romance,  inculcating  obedience  to  the  Law,  and  the  burial 
of  the  dead.  The  scene  is  laid  in  Assyria  under  Sennacherib 
and  his  predecessor  and  successor.  Tobit  is  an  Israelite 
captive.  The  archangel  Raphael  heals  Tobit's  blindness, 
and  obtains  for  his  son  Tobias  the  hand  of  Sarah,  daughter 
of  Raguel,  in  spite  of  the  demon  Asmodeus.  It  contains  a 
brief  apocalyptic  poem  put  into  the  mouth  of  Tobit. 

26.  Wisdom  of  Solomon. — A  Greek  work,  composed  in  the 
first  century  B.C.  by  an  Alexandrian  Jew,  preserved  in  the 
LXX.  An  essay  on  Wisdom  as  the  divine  agent  in  creation  and 
in  the  providential  government  of  the  world,  as  illustrated  by 
the  history  of  Israel,  and  in  the  spiritual  discipline  of  man. 
As  combining  O.T.  teaching  with  that  of  Greek  philosophy, 
it  is  closely  allied  to  Philo's  works,  and  has  sometimes  been 
ascribed  to  that  philosopher,  but  wrongly. 

*  See  p.  272  n. 


THE    NEW   TESTAMENT 


INTRODUCTORY 

The  New  Testament — literally  the  new  Covenant,  as  that 
part  of  the  Bible  which  deals  with  the  covenant  predicted  by 
Jeremiah,^  and  introduced  and  confirmed  by  Jesus  Christ ^ — 
contains  the  especially  Christian  scriptures,  although,  from  the 
first,  Christianity  has  claimed  the  Jewish  scriptures,  and  al- 
though the  N.T.  writers  repeatedly  appeal  to  them  as  inspired 
authorities,  and  for  the  proofs  they  afford  of  the  Christian 
teachings.  The_contents_of_the  N.T^  consist  of  records  of 
the  jife^^ath,_and.j:fi&\irrectinn  nf  Je&us  ChrisJ:;  ^historical 
account  oLlhie_£a£lyj:llurches  and  of  the  missionary  work  of 
some  of  their  leaders;  a  number  of  letters  to~cHufcHes^"and 
individual  persons,  treating  of  the  profoundest  question  pf 
religious^truth,  but  also  jeyoting  much  attejntion  to  practical 
duties  and  Church  administration,  and^bouriding  in  expires- 
sions  of  affectTohat^'Tntefest ;  and_  lastly,,„standing^  quite  -by 
itself,  the  Apocal^psgj  with  itslmysteries  pflstrange  symbolism. 

It  was  only  in  course  of  time  that  all  these  books  were 
united  in  one  volume.  First  we  meet  with  a  collection  of 
the  gospels,  called  "  The  Gospel,"  then  with  St.  Paul's  epistles, 
called  "The  Apostle."   By  degrees  the  other  books  were  added. 

Two  influences  in  particular  helped  to  settle  the  canon  of 
the  N.T.  The  first  was  the  use  of  certain  books  in  public 
worship,  since  it  was  necessary  to  determine  which  books  were 
to  be  so  employed.  The  second  was  the  call  to  refute  erro- 
neous opinions  by  appeal  to  primitive  authority.     In  early 

*  Jer.  xxxi.  31  ff. 

*  Mark  xiv.  24 ;  Heb.  vii.  22 ;  viii,  6  ff. 


276  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

times  people  of  peculiar  views  made  their  own  selections. 
Thus  the  extreme  Paulinists  following  Marcion  only  used 
eleven  books — a  mutilated  edition  of  Luke  and  ten  of  St. 
Paul's  Epistles.^  On  the  other  hand,  some  of  the  Jewish 
Christians  rejected  the  Pauline  Epistles  and  Acts,  but  received 
the  "  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews." 

Meanwhile  the  main  body  of  Christians  was  feeling  its  way 
towards  the  canon  we  now  possess,  guided  by  two  principles — 
apostolic  authorship,  and  traditional  acceptance  in  the  oldest 
and  principal  Churches. 

Harnack  holds  that  this  canon  was  deliberately  formed  between  A.D.  150 
and  170,  because  there  is  no  sign  of  it  in  Justin  Martyr  at  the  earlier  date, 
while  a  little  after  the  later  date  Irenseus  is  found  appealing  to  most  of 
our  N.T.  books  as  authorities,  and  quoting  them  freely  on  the  evident 
assumption  that  they  are  familiar  to  his  readers.  Dr.  Sanday  considers 
that  this  hypothesis  involves  too  sudden  a  movement  for  Irenreus  to  be 
making  his  appeals  in  full  assurance  that  they  will  be  understood  and 
admitted.     History  knows  of  no  such  formal  settlement  of  the  canon. 

By  the  end  of  the  second  century  most  of  our  N.T,  books 
were  recognised  and  appealed  to  as  authorities,  though  the 
Western  Churches  were  slow  to  accept  Hebrews  and  the 
Catholic  Epistles  (except  i  John  and  Jude,  of  which  they  show 
no  doubts),  and  the  Eastern  Churches  were  slow  to  accept 
Revelation  and  some  of  the  Catholic  Epistles. 

By  the  end  of  the  third  century  even  these  books  on  the 
margin  of  the  canon  were  generally  accepted.  After  this  we 
come  to  the  direct  testimony  of  the  MSS.,  the  oldest  of  which 
date  from  the  fourth  century. 

^  Omitting  i  and  2  Timothy,  Titus,  and  Hebrews — ascribed  by  many 
to  the  apostle. 


CHAPTER   I. 
THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS 

1.  The  Gospels.  I  3.  Mark. 

2.  Matthew.  |  4.  Luke. 

I.  The  Gospels. 

a.  The  Word  Gospel. — The  word  gospel,  meaning  "glad 
tidingSx!!^  was  not  used  as  the  title  of  the  four  books  to 
which  it  is  attached  in  our  N.T.  when  those  books  were 
written.  In  early  times  it  was  confined  to  the  message 
of  redemption  in  Jesus  Christ  which  was  preached  by  our 
Lord  tlimselt  arid  His  disciples.^  But  inasmuch  as  the 
message  is  really  presented  most  fully  and  clearly  in  the 
story  of  the  Hfe  of  Christ,  when  that  story  was  written  out 
it  came  to  be  regarded  as  a  narrative  of  the  gospel  Still, 
as  there  could  be  but  one  gospel  in  the  primary  sense  of 
the_wordf  the  several  narratives  would  not  be  regarded  as 
so  many_gos2els,  but  only  as  so  many  accounts  of  the  gospelT 
Therefore  when  the  word  was  first  attached  to  them  it 
retained  its  reference  to  the  glad  tidings  which  had  been 
preached,  and  meant  that  the  one  gospel  was  set  forth  in 
each  of  these  books.  For  this  reason  we  read  of  "the 
gospel  of  God,"  ^  with  reference  to  its  source — God  revealing 
the  good  news,  and  "the  gospel  of  Christ"-^  with  reference 
to  its  contents — the  gospel  telling  about  Christ,  but  never 
of  the  gospel  of  Matthew,  the  gospel  of  Mark.     The  men 

2  This  must  be  the  case  in  Mark  i.  I,  the  word  gospel  there  not 
describing  the  book,  but  the  message  of  good  news,  as  the  added  phrase 
' '  of  Jesus  Christ "  shows. 

'  Uom.  XV.  16.  ■*  i.  Cor.  ix,  12. 

277 


278  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

to  whom  the  books  were  ascribed  had  to  be  connected  with 
them  in  some  other  way.  This  seems  to  be  the  explanation 
of  the  fact  that  the  titles  appear  as  "  the  gospel  according  to 
Matthew,"  "  the  gospel  according  to  Mark,"  etc.,i  i.e.^  Matthew's 
version  of  the  gospel,  Mark's  version,  etc.  The  books  only 
came  to  be  known  as  gospels  in  the  second  century. 

As  far  as  it  can  be  traced  the  word  "  gospel "  is  first  given 
to  a  written  account  of  the  life  of  Christ  in  the  time  of 
Marcion  {c.  a.d.  i4o).2  Justin  Martyr,  writing  to  the  Roman 
Senate,  the  members  of  which  knew  nothing  of  the  Christian 
books,  refers  to  the  gospels  as  "the  Memoirs  of  the 
Apostles ";2  but  he  notes  that  they  are  "called  gospels."* 

b.  The  Four  Gospels. — Many  attempts  were  made  to  set 
forth  the  story  of  Christ  even  before  our  Third  Gospel 
was  written;^  and  several  more  were  made  during  the 
next  half  century.  Harnack  has  constructed  a  list  of 
twenty  gospels,  concerning  which  some  information  has 
been  preserved,  while  many  others  have  fallen  out  of  notice. 

Harnack's  list  is  as  follows  : — 
1-4.  The  canonical  gospels. 

5.  The  gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews. 

6.  The  gospel  of  the  Twelve  Apostles. 

7.  The  Peter  gospel. 

8.  The  Egyptian  gospel. 

9.  The  Matthias  gospel. 

10.  The  Philip  gospel. 

11.  The  Thomas  gospel. 

12.  The  Protevangelium  of  James. 

13.  The  Acts  of  Pilate  (gospel  of  Nicodemus). 

14.  Basilides'  gospel. 

15.  Valentinus'  gospel. 

16.  Marcion's  gospel. 

17.  The  gospel  of  Eve. 

18.  The  gospel  of  Judas. 

19.  The  writing,  Tivpa  Map^as  (also  the  "  Great  and  little  questions  of 

Mary"). 

20.  The  gospel  TeXciwtrcws.* 

^  Kark  'M.addatov^  etc. 

"^  Tertullian,  Adv.  Marcion,  iv.  2. 

^  TO.  aTOfivrjfxovevra  tQv  aTroaTdXwv. 

*  &,  KaXetrai  evayY^ia,  Apol.  i.  66. 

^  See  Luke  i.  i. 

^  Chronologies  pp.  589-651. 


THE   GOSPELS  279 

Some  few  of  these  books  may  have  been  independent 
of  the  N.T.  gospels;  but,  as  far  as  can  be  discovered, 
most  of  them  were  late  apocryphal  works,  either  directly 
based  on  the  canonical  gospels,  or  relying  on  legends  and 
imaginative  materials  of  a  manifestly  unhistorical  character. 
The  gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews  is  the  only  one  that 
was  at  all  generally  received  and  relied  upon  in  the  main 
body  of  the  Church  in  addition  to  our  four  gospels.  The 
question  then  arises,  how  wa§_itJthaJ;-lhese  four  were  selected 
for  especial  honour^  and  they  alone  admitted  into  the  carion 
when  it  was  formed^?  The  answeris  that  they  were  regarded 
as  of  apostolic  authority,  two  of  them  being  ascribed~ip 
apostles  (Matthew  and  John),  and  two  to  companions  of 
apostles  (Mark  the  companion  of  Peter,  Luke  the  companion 
of  Paul).  Other  gospels  claimed  apostoHc  authority,  but  the 
claim  was  rejected  as  unauthentic.  Then  several  of  the 
gospels  early  put  into  circulation  were  tainted  with  Jewish 
or  gnostic  views,  and  only  received  among  the  separated 
bodies  in  which  those  views  were  cherished,  their  "heresy" 
condemning  them  in  the  eyes  of  Catholics.  Marcion's  gospel 
was  a  mutilation  of  our  Luke,  especially  adapted  to  the  views 
of  the  Marcionites.  When  this  was  not  the  case,  the  triviality, 
the  absurdity,  the  manifestly  legendary  character  of  other 
gospel  writings  were  signs  of  their  untrustworthiness  as 
historical  records.  Undoubtedly  the  sobriety  and  truthful- 
ness of  our  gospels,  their  own  inherent  worth,  in  addition 
to  the  apostolic  traditions,  commended  them  to  use  in  the 
churches  above  their  rivals.  It  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that 
nearly  all  the  references  to  sayings  and  doings  of  our  Lord 
in  the  writings  of  the  early  Fathers  can  be  traced  to  our 
N.T.  gospels,  though  often  not  in  verbal  agreement  with 
them. 

c.  Early  Testimony  to  the  Gospels. — Eusebius  when  sorting 
out  the  universally  received  books  of  the  canon,  in  distinction 
from  those  which  some  have  questioned,  writes  :  "And  here 
among  the  first  must  be  placed  the  holy  quaternion  of  the 
gospels."  {H,E.,  iii.  25.)   The  gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews 


28o  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

he  places  among  the  disputed  books.     He  only  mentions  the 
apocryphal  gospels  to  reject  them. 

Eusebius  is  especially  important  for  the  early  authorities— now  lost  to 
us— which  he  cites  in  witness  of  N.T.  books.  But  here  an  important 
question  has  been  raised  by  the  author  of  Supernatural  Religion.  Are 
we  to  infer  that  when  Eusebius  does  not  give  us  the  testimony  of  a 
certain  author  to  any  book  of  the  N.T.,  that  author  must  have  known 
nothing  about  it  ?  The  author  of  Supernatural  Religion  answered  in  the 
affirmative,  and  argued  accordingly  from  ' '  the  silence  of  Eusebius  "  that 
the  four  gospels  were  not  all  known  in  the  first  half  of  the  second  century, 
because  Eusebius  does  not  give  the  witness  of  writers  of  that  period.  But 
Bishop  Eightfoot  replied  with  crushing  effect,  showing  the  utter  fallacious- 
ness of  this  style  of  reasoning.  It  implies:  (i)  that  if  Eusebius  does 
not  cite  a  writer's  testimony,  that  writer  did  not  leave  any  testimony; 
and  (2)  that  if  the  writer  did  not  quote  a  N.T.  book,  he  must  have 
been  ignorant  of  that  book.  Thus  it  is  argued  that  Hegesippus  did  not 
know  our  gospels  because  Eusebius  does  not  quote  any  testimony  to 
them  from  that  author,  whom,  however,  he  quotes  for  other  purposes, 
and  therefore  proves  himself  to  know  ;  that  Papias  did  not  know  Luke 
or  John  because  Eusebius  only  quotes  what  he  says  about  Matthew 
and  Mark,  etc.  Now  the  argument  turns  entirely  on  the  purpose  of 
Eusebius.  In  describing  this  he  discriminates,  saying  of  the  disputed 
books  that  he  will  indicate  what  church  writers  have  "made  use  of" 
them,  while  he  only  promises  to  give,  concerning  the  undisputed,  any 
information  that  has  been  **made  a,bout  them,"^  /.<?.,  any  historical 
statements  or  anecdotes  about  them.  Thus,  for  example,  Clement  R. 
definitely  names  our  i  Corinthians ;  Justin  Martyr  cites  from  our  gospels 
under  the  name,  "Memoirs  of  the  Apostles";  Theophilus  of  Antioch  is 
the  first  writer  to  quote  the  gospel  according  to  St.  John  by  naiTie  ;  Irenseus 
cites  Acts  as  Luke's,  and  cites  all  St.  Paul's  epistles  except  Philemon,  yet 
Eusebius  reproduces  none  of  these  testimonies,  and  for  the  sirnple  reason 
that  it  did  not  come  within  his  announced  plan  to  do  so.  The  books 
referred  to  were  not  disputed,  and  the  references  gave  no  specific  in- 
formation about  them.  So  in  the  case  of  Papias  he  only  cites  certain 
statements  about  two  gospel  writings  ;  he  does  not  say  what  gospels 
Papias  used^  for  the  gospels  were  undisputed,  and  therefore  he  only 
collected  anecdotes  and  historical  statements  about  them.  But  in  the 
case  of  disputed  books  Eusebius  follows  a  different  course,  collecting 
all  the  evidence  for  the  use  of  them  that  he  can  lay  hands  on.  The 
author  of  Supernatural  Religion  replied  to  Dr.  Lightfoot  to  the  effect 
that  the  omissions  in  Eusebius  referred  to  above  might  be  due  to  over- 
sight on  his  part.  That  is  most  improbable,  for  Eusebius  was  scholarly 
and  thorough  ;  nobody  who  knew  Irenaus's  writings — and  Eusebius 
certainly  knew  them — could  fail  to  observe  that  Father's  many  quotations 
from  St.  Paul's  epistles.  Yet  Eusebius  never  appeals  to  the  testimony 
of  them.  This  could  not  be  owing  to  oversight.  But  further,  if  Eusebius 
had  been  so  careless  with  the  testimony  of  Irenseus  to  St.  Paul,  he  might 
have  been  equally  careless  in  the  case  of  testimony  of  Papias  to  Luke 

^  rivet  tG)v  Kark  xpovovi  iKK\r)<ria<TTLKCiv  (rvyypa(f>iwv  oirolan  k^xPVV^o^ 
Tuv  avTCKeyofxhoiVy  t'lvo.  re  irepi  rcDv  ivbiad-fjK(i:v  Kal  6fio\oyovfj,^vojv 
ypatpwv  Kai  baa  irepi  tQv  firj  tolovtcov  avrols  etprjTai.  —  H.E.y  iii,   3. 


THE  GOSPELS  281 

or  John.     Thus  the  argument  from  "the  silence  of  Eusebius"  falls  to 
the  ground. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen,  and  Tertullian  *  were  familiar 
with  our  four  gospels,  frequently  quoting  and  commenting  on 
all  of  them.  Irenaeus  (a.d.  180)  not  only  knows  and  quotes 
the  four  gospels,  but  introduces  quaint,  fantastic  arguments  to 
prove  that  they  must  be  just  four,  no  more  and  no  less.^  The 
very  absurdity  of  his  reasoning  testifies  to  the  well-established 
position  attained  in  his  day  by  the  four  to  the  exclusion  of  all 
others.  Irenaeus's  bishop  was  Pothinus,  who  lived  to  the  age 
of  90,  and  Irenaeus  had  known  Polycarp  in  Asia  Minor. 
Here  are  links  of  connection  with  the  past  that  go  back 
beyond  the  beginning  of  the  second  century.  Thus  Irenaeus's 
testimony  to  the  gospels  is  exceptionally  significant.  The 
Muratorian  Fragment  testifies  directly  to  Luke  and  John, 
and  indirectly  to  the  other  two  gospels,  as  it  begins  with 
words  that  evidently  refer  to  Mark,^  and  introduces  Luke  as 
"the  third  gospel."  The  gospels  are  found  in  the  Peshitto  and 
other  early  Syriac  versions  probably  of  the  second  century. 

Then  the  recently  recovered  Diatessaron  of  Tatian  comes 
in  to  show  that  all  four  gospels  were  acknowledged  and  their 
position  well  enough  established  for  this  harmony  to  be  made 
from  them  for  use  in  public  worship,  probably  at  Edessa, 
during  the  second  century. 

The  Diatessaron.^ — The  finding  of  this  book  is  one  of  the  most  im- 

^  Tertullian  even  refers  to  a  Latin  version  known  to  himself  and  his 
readers.     This  carries  us  back  beyond  his  time. 

-  "  It  is  not  possible  that  the  gospels  can  be  either  more  or  fewer  in 
number  than  they  are.  For  since  there  are  four  zones  of  the  world  in 
which  we  live,  and  four  principal  winds,  while  the  church  is  scattered 
throughout  all  the  world,  and  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  church  is  the 
gospel  and  the  spirit  of  life,  it  is  fitting  that  she  should  have  four  pillars, 
breathing  out  immortality  on  every  side,  and  vivifying  men  afresh."  Adv. 
Haer.,  iii.  9,  8. 

'  "Quibus  tamen  interfuit  et  ita  posuit,"a  remark  coming  just  before  the 
mention  of  St,  Luke's  gospel,  that  seems  clearly  to  point  to  St.  Peter  as  one 
who  had  taken  part  in  the  events  recorded,  and  so  to  the  gospel  commonly 
held  to  be  derived  from  his  teaching, 

*  The  word  Diatessaron  may  be  taken  in  its  literal  translation,  "  by 
means  of  four,"  as  meaning  that  which  is  constructed  out  of  four  documents ; 
but  more  probably  it  just  means  "a  Harmony,"  being  derived  from  the 
idea  of  the  four  parts  in  music. 


282  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

portant  literary  discoveries  of  the  century.  It  was  well  known  that  Tatian 
the  Assyrian,  a  disciple  of  Justin  Martyr,  had  written  a  Harmony  of  the 
gospels — either  in  Greek  or  Syriac,  we  do  not  know  which — for  several 
allusions  to  it  were  found  in  ecclesiastical  writers,  ^  but  the  work  itself  had 
been  lost  sight  of  till  it  was  brought  to  light  in  our  own  day.  Dionysius- 
Bar-Salibi  {ob.  1207)  mentions  that  Ephraem  the  Syrian,  a  deacon  of 
Edessa,  wrote  a  commentary  on  Tatian's  Diatessaron.  An  Armenian 
version  of  that  commentary  was  published  by  the  monks  of  St.  Lazzaro,  near 
Venice,  out  of  which  Zahn  endeavoured  to  reconstruct  the  original  text. 
Meanwhile  an  Arabic  MS.  of  the  Diatessaron  itself  was  lying  unnoticed 
in  the  Vatican  library.  The  publication  of  Zahn's  work  led  Agostino 
Ciasca,  one  of  the  guild  of  writers  at  the  Vatican,  to  turn  his  attention  to 
the  subject.  From  the  Visitor  Apostolic  of  the  Catholic  Copts  he  obtained 
another  Arabic  MS.,  and  this  he  published  in  the  year  1888,  accompanied 
with  a  Latin  translation.  The  Arabic  has  since  been  translated  into 
English.^  The  author  of  Supernatural  Religion  had  maintained  that  the 
Diatessaron  was  too  ancient  to  have  been  constructed  out  of  our  gospels  ; 
but  now  we  have  it  before  us  we  see  that  most  certainly  this  was  the  case. 
It  begins  with  the  prologue  from  John,  and  as  it  proceeds  with  the  narra- 
tive it  pieces  together  extracts  from  each  of  the  four  gospels.  It  is  to  be 
observed  that  it  omits  our  Lord's  genealogies,  which  we  have  in  Matthew 
and  Luke,  probably  from  a  gnostic  objection  to  allow  any  human  relation- 
ship.^ 

Thus  before  the  end  of  the  second  century  we  see  our 
gospels  accepted  in  Rome  (the  Muratorian  Fragment),  in  Gaul, 
and  also  in  Asia  Minor  (Irenaeus),  in  Africa  (Tertullian 
and  the  Old  Latin  version),  in  Egypt  (Clement),  in  Syria 
(Tatian,  the  Diatessaron^  and  the  Syriac  versions).  Still  more 
ancient  testimony  is  forthcoming,  though  it  becomes  less 
distinct  as  we  push  the  inquiry  further  back  to  times  of 
comparative  obscurity.  There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that 
Justin  Martyr  used  the  gospels  we  have  in  our  N.T.  under  the 
title  of  Memoirs  of  the  Apostles.  Writing  to  the  Roman 
Senate,  which  knew  nothing  of  the  Christian  books,  and  re- 
porting a  discussion  with  a  Jew,  he  naturally  uses  a  descriptive 
periphrasis,  but,  as  we  have  seen,  he  states  that  they  were 
called  gospels.      Nearly  all  the  many  sayings  and  incidents 

1  The  Doctrine  of  Addai,  xxxv.  15-17  ;  EusEBlUS,  H.E.^  iv.  29, 
Epiphanius,  Haer,,  xlvi.    i,  Theodoret,  Haer.^  i.  20,  etc 

2  The  Earliest  Life  of  Christ,  etc.,  by  Rev.  Hamlyn  Hill,  whose 
translation  from  the  Latin  was  collated  with  the  Arabic  by  Dr.  G. 
Buchanan  Gray,  of  Mansfield  College. 

•^  Harnack  is  of  opinion  not  only  that  the  Diatessaron  presupposes 
our  gospels,  but  that  it  bears  traces  of  having  been  based  on  a  still  earlier 
harmony  of  them. — Chronolo^^icy  p.  435  (2). 


THE   GOSPELS  283 

from  the  life  and  teaching  of  Christ  which  he  mentions  are  to 
be  found  in  our  gospels,  and  when  he  gives  any  that  are  not  in 
our  gospels  he  does  not  attribute  these  to  the  Memoirs. 

The  following  are  Justin's  statements  not  found  in  our  gospels  : — That 
Jesus  was  born  in  a  cave;  that  the  Magi  came  from  Arabia;  that  Herod 
killed  all  the  children  in  Bethlehem ;  that  Jesus  made  ploughs  and  yokes ; 
that  at  His  baptism  a  fire  was  kindled  in  the  Jordan,  and  a  voice  then  said, 
*'  Thou  art  my  son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee."^ 

Now  it  has  been  objected  that  Justin's  quotations  do  not  verbally 
coincide  with  corresponding  passages  in  our  gospels.  But  then  his  quota- 
tions from  the  LXX.  are  equally  loose,  and  there  we  know  what  authority 
he  is  following.  In  the  case  of  the  O.T.  he  combines  two  or  three  passages 
in  a  single  paragraph,  and  he  quotes  the  same  passage  twice  with  different 
variations  from  the  original  on  each  occasion.  '^  Evidently  then  he  quotes 
from  memory,  and  without  taking  care  to  be  verbally  accurate.  This 
was  the  custom  with  citations  made  in  the  primitive  ages  before  the  N.T. 
books  had  been  reckoned  of  canonical  rank,  and  while  tradition  was 
still  fresh  enough  to  allow  literature  not  to  be  regarded  as  of  para- 
mount importance.  Moreover,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  discovery  of 
the  Diatessaron  removes  all  question  as  to  Justin's  use  of  our  gospels,  for 
since  Tatian  was  a  disciple  of  Justin's,  it  is  inconceivable  that  he  should 
have  worked  on  quite  diflerent  gospels  from  those  of  his  teacher,  while 
each  held  the  gospels  he  used  to  be  the  books  of  primary  importance. 

Then  Papias  knew  at  least  Mark  and  a  Hebrew  Matthew.^ 
The  evidence  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  is  more  difficult  to 
disentangle.  None  of  them  name  the  gospels  or  cite  them 
with  verbal  exactness.  It  has  been  suggested  that  "The 
Shepherd  of  Hermas "  abounds  in  references  to  the  four 
gospels,^  but  the  mystical  imagery  of  that  book  is  too  obscure 
for  this  to  be  maintained  with  assurance.  In  the  "  Epistle  of 
Barnabas"  there  are  several  passages  that  coincide  more  or  less 
closely  with  Matthew,  and  once  the  author  uses  the  technical 
expression  for  inspired  Scripture  "it  is  written"  for  a  saying 
that  we  have  in  Matthew  :  "  As  it  is  written,  many  are  called, 

1  This  last  statement  is  in  the  MS.  D  of  Luke.  Possibly  Justin  had  a 
similar  text.  The  other  statements  may  have  come  down  in  tradition  ;  or 
they  may  have  been  found  in  some  other  gospel,  and  if  so,  most  likely  in 
the  gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews. 

"^  It  has  been  pointed  out  that  some  of  his  O.T.  quotations  are  more 
accurat^.  These  are  from  the  Psalms,  the  exact  words  of  which  are  better 
known  owing  to  the  use  of  them  in  public  worship. 

3  EusEBius,  H.E.,  iii.  39.  To  be  considered  later  with  reference  to 
each  of  these  gospels. 

*  Taylor,  The  Witmss  of  Hermas  to  the  Gospels, 


284  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

but  few  are  chosen."  (Barnabas  iv.  i\^  cf.  Matthew  xxii.  14.) 

Clement  R.  gives  several  of  our  Lord's  sayings  which  come 

very  near  to  Matthew — nearer  than  to  Luke,  but  not  verbally 

coinciding.     Resch  has  suggested  that  he  had  one  of  the 

sources  of  our  gospels,  while  Dr.  Sanday  inclines  to  regard 

the  quotations  as  drawn  from  some  notes  for  catechumens, 

based  on  our  gospels  or  on  Matthew's  collection  of  the  sayings 

of  Christ. 

Clement  writes:  "Most  of  all  remembering  the  words  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  which  He  spake,  teaching  forbearance  and  longsuffering :  for  thus 
He  spake ;  Have  mercy,  that  ye  may  receive  mercy  :  forgive,  that  it  may 
be  forgiven  to  you.  As  ye  do,  so  shall  it  be  done  to  you.  As  ye  give,  so 
shall  it  be  given  unto  you.  As  ye  judge,  so  shall  ye  be  judged.  As  ye 
shew  kindness,  so  shall  kindness  be  shewed  unto  you.  With  what  measure 
ye  mete,  it  shall  be  measured  withal  to  you."  (Clement  R.,  i  Corinthians 
xiii.)  It  is  evident  that  this  is  not  an  exact  quotation  from  Matthew, 
though  it  comes  nearest  to  that  gospel.  In  particular  it  is  to  be  observed 
that  while  Clement  gives  us  the  two  sayings  of  Matthew  vii.  i,  "Judge 
not,  that  ye  be  not  judged:  and  with  what  measure  ye  mete,  it  shall  be 
measured  unto  you,"  he  has  the  first  in  a  different  form  :  "As  ye  judge, 
so  shall  ye  be  judged,"  and  he  inserts  another  saying  between  this  and  the 
second  one  in  Matthew,  viz.,  "As  ye  shew  kindness,  so  shall  kindness  be 
shewed  unto  you."  'Wi&form  of  the  concluding  sayings  seems  to  echo  the 
form  in  St.  Luke's  version  (vi.  36-38).  We  know  that  Clement  quotes  loosely 
from  memory,  because  this  is  his  habit  with  the  O.T.*  Possibly,  therefore, 
he  does  so  here  with  Matthew,  and  perhaps  also  Luke.  But  we  cannot 
cite  him  with  assurance  as  a  witness  to  those  gospels,  as  it  is  quite  possible 
that  he  is  using  some  other  document  containing  the  sayings  of  Christ. 

The  case  of  the  DidacJie  is  similar.  Five  times  the  author 
quotes  sayings  of  Christ  as  given  "  in  the  gospel,"  but  in  his 
primitive  age  that  phrase  was  not  used  for  any  book,  and  it 
must  mean  the  preaching  of  the  glad  tidings.  These  sayings 
can  all  be  traced  to  Matthew  and  Luke.^ 

The  Lord's  prayer  is  given  almost  verbally  as  in  Matthew  ^ 
{Didach^  viii.  2). 

The  saying,  "Give  not  that  which  is  holy  unto  the  dogs" 

^  e.g.,  compare  Clement,  i  Cor.  iii.  i  with  Deut.  xxxii.  15  ;  I  Cor.  viii.  2 
with  Ezekiel  xxxiii.  1 1.  i  Cor.  xxix.  2,  3  seems  to  be  a  combination  of 
Numb,  xviii.  27,  Deut.  iv.  34,  and  2  Chron.  xxxi.  14. 

^  Harnack  is  decidedly  of  opinion  that  the  author  used  both  Matt, 
and  Luke.     Ckronologie,  p.  435. 

'  The  only  variations  are  kv  ry  ovpavip  for  iv  tois  oi'pavoU,  iXdiro)  for 
iXddru),  dtpiefxev  for  d(pi^KaiJ.ev,  tt}v  6<f>u\fjv  for  to.  o^etXTj/Aara,  and  in  the 
doxolugy,  which  is  later  than  the  original  text  of  Matthew. 


MATTHEW  28s 

{Didacht  ix.  5)  agrees  verbally  with  Matthew  vii.  6.  Still 
these  are  utterances  of  Christ  that  might  well  be  kept  in  their 
exact  form  in  other  lists  of  Logia.  There  is  one  saying  which 
is  not  to  be  found  in  any  of  our  gospels,  viz.,  "  It  hath  been 
also  said  concerning  this  matter,  Let  thine  alms  drop  like 
sweat  into  thy  hands,  so  long  as  thou  knowest  not  to  whom 
thou  givest."  {DidacJie  i.  6.)  On  the  whole  we  may  conclude 
that  these  allusions  to  sayings  of  Christ  in  the  Apostolic  Fathers 
render  it  highly  probable  that  Matthew,  and  also,  though  less 
assuredly,  Luke,  were  used  by  them,  and  that  even  if  that  were 
not  the  case,  the  collections  of  sayings  quoted  are  seen  to  be 
so  near  to  our  gospels  as  to  be  themselves  partial  confirma- 
tions of  the  historicity  of  those  documents. 

2.  Matthew. 

a.  The  Apostle  Matthew, — This  apostle,  also  known  as 
Levi  the  son  of  Alphaeus,^  was  the  collector  of  customs 
at  Capernaum,  whom  Jesus  called  as  he  sat  at  his  work  by 
the  entrance  to  the  city,  and  who  made  a  feast  in  honour  of 
our  Lord,  to  which  he  invited  his  fellow  tax-collectors  in  the 
neighbourhood.  Forsaking  his  lucrative  office  to  follow 
Christ,  he  became  one  of  the  Twelve,  but  he  did  not 
emerge  into  sufficient  distinctive  activity  during  our  Lord's 
lifetime  to  have  any  further  doings  of  his  noted  down  in 
the  gospels.  According  to  a  late  tradition  he  preached  for 
fifteen  years  in  Judaea,  and  then  ministered  in  Parthia  or 
Ethiopia.2  The  interesting  part  of  this  tradition  is  the 
connection  of  his  name  with  a  ministry  to  the  Jews.  The 
early  references  to  his  literary  work  point  in  that  direction. 

b.  St.  Matthew's  Hebrew  Work.— It  is  repeatedly  asserted  by 
early  Church  writers  that  Matthew  wrote  his  gospel  in  Hebrew. 
But  the  earHest  reference  to  his  work — that  of  Papias — 
describes  it  as  Logia^  a.  word  which  seems  to  indicate  sacred 
sayings,  "oracles,"  rather  than  historical  narratives.  That 
such  a  work  may  have  contained  connecting  historical  matter 

*  Compare  Mark  ii.  14  and  I.uke  v.  27  with  Matt.  ix.  9. 
'^  See  EusEBius,  ^.E.,  iii.  24 ;  Socrates,  H.£.,  i.  19. 


286  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

is  very  probable,  and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  this  was 

the  case  with  St.  Matthew's  book.     Still  the  reference  to  the 

Hebrew  language  and  the  use  of  the  title  Logia  furnish  two 

reasons  for  supposing  that  Papias  cannot  be  referring  to  our 

gospel,  and  that  we  have  here  some  earlier  work  consisting 

chiefly  of  sayings  of  Christ."^ 

Papias  writes:  "Matthew  then  composed  the  Logia  in  the  Hebrew 
tongue,  and  every  one  translated  them  as  he  was  able."*  His  statement 
of  the  translating  in  the  past  tense — "every  one  translated'^ — seems  to 
suggest  that  this  troublesome  process  with  its  varying  results  was  no 
longer  necessary,  because  the  work  was  now  rendered  in  Greek. 
Irenaeus  writes :  "  Matthew  among  tlie  Hebrews  published  a  gospel 
in  their  own  language."  {Adv.  Haer.,  iii.  i.)  Origen  says  in  his  account 
of  the  gospels :  "  The  first  was  written  by  Matthew,  once  a  publican, 
afterwards  an  apostle  of  the  Lord,  and  delivered  to  the  Jewish  believers 
composed  in  the  Hebrew  language."^  (Eusebius,  H.E.,  vi.  25.)  Eusebius 
himself  tells  us  that  "  Matthew  having  first  preached  to  the  Hebrews, 
when  he  was  about  to  go  to  other  people,  delivered  to  them  in  their  own 
language  the  gospel  according  to  him."  {H.E.,  iii.  24.)  Lastly  we  have 
Jerome  writing :  **  Matthew,  also  called  Levi,  who  firom  being  a  publican 
became  an  apostle,  first  wrote  a  gospel  of  Christ  in  Judoea  and  in  Hebrew 
letters  and  words  {Uteris  vcrbisque)  for  the  benefit  of  those  of  the  circum- 
cision who  believed.  Who  afterwards  translated  it  into  Greek  is  not  quite 
certain."  {De  Vir.  III.,  3.)  He  adds  that  he  himself  had  seen  it,  and  that 
the  Nazarenes  who  had  a  copy  of  the  original  in  the  library  of  Pamphilus 
at  Csesarea  allowed  him  to  transcribe  it.  He  had  previously  stated  that 
when  at  Beroea  he  had  translated  the  gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews 
which  the  Nazarenes  and  Ebionites  used  into  Greek  and  Latin.  Further, 
both  Eusebius  and  Jerome  state  that  Pantsenus  found  in  India  the  gospel  of 
Matthew  which  was  written  in  India,  and  Jerome  adds  that  Pantoenus 
brought  it  to  Alexandria. 

The  case  is  very  complicated ;  but  the  following  facts  seem 
to  come  out  of  it :  (i)  It  is  impossible  to  resist  the  wide- 

^  Dr.  Lightfoot  urged  that  the  word  Logia  could  be  used  for  the  gospel, 
because  it  stands  for  the  O.T.  Scriptures.  But  when  it  is  so  used,  it  can 
best  be  understood  as  indicating  the  Divine  utterances  in  the  Law  or 
through  the  Prophets,  rather  than  the  very  books  of  the  O.T.  (See 
Acts  vii.  38  ;  Rom.  iii,  2.)  So  it  could  be  applied  to  inspired  Chris- 
tian teaching  in  Heb.  v.  12,  and  even  to  the  utterances  of  Christian 
prophets  in  i.  Peter  iv.  ii.  It  is  most  improbable  that  so  early  as 
Papias  it  would  be  applied  to  a  historical  record.  Greek  writers  use  the 
word  for  the  Pagan  and  Sibylline  oracles.  In  the  LXX.  it  is  the  trans- 
lation of  T^n,  the  High  Priest's  breastplate,  with  a  reference  to  its  use  in 
divination. 

2  Mar^atos  jxev  oZv  'E/S/safSt  SiaX^/cry  tA  \lyyLa  avveyp6.\}/a.T0.  "Qp/x-liyevae 
d'airrk  ws  ^f  Swards  ^/cao-ros. — EUSEBIUS,  l/.E.,  iii.  39. 

*  yp6.fi/M<nv  'Eppal'KoTs  cvvT€Ta.ynivov. 


MATTHEW  287 

spread  and  quite  uncontradicted  statements  that  Matthew 
wrote  in  Hebrew — this  may  be  the  sacred  language,  or  the 
writers  may  mean  the  current  language  of  Palestine,  Aramaic. 
(2)  Most  of  these  writers  appear  to  identify  Matthew's  work 
with  the  original  of  our  Matthew.  (3)  None  of  them  assert 
that  they  saw  the  Hebrew  gospel  to  which  they  refer  except 
Jerome,  and  he  adds  that  he  translated  it  into  Greek  and 
Latin.  But  this  implies  that  it  could  not  have  been  the 
original  of  our  Matthew,  since  the  Greek  Matthew  and  its 
Latin  versions  were  already  familiar  to  Jerome.  Moreover, 
extracts  from  the  gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews  have 
been  preserved,  and  these  are  manifestly  not  taken  from 
our  Matthew ;  ^  most  of  them  have  a  late  and  apocryphal 
character.  It  looks  as  though  there  were  a  double  confusion 
here.  First  Papias'  statement  is  assumed  to  apply  to  our 
Matthew.  Then  the  well-known  gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews  is  also  assumed  to  be  the  Logia  to  which  Papias 
referred.  Its  late  apocryphal  character,  however,  proves  that 
this  cannot  be  the  case.  In  point  of  fact  we  have  three 
works  :  (i)  Papias'  Logia^  which  is  St.  Matthew's  real  Hebrew 
work;  (2)  our  Greek  Matthew;  (3)  the  gospel  according  to 
the  Hebrews,  probably  founded  on  one  or  both  of  these. 
This  last  was  the  book  which  Jerome  saw  and  translated,  and 
which  came  in  course  of  time  to  be  mistaken  for  St.  Matthew's 
Logia^  though  it  was  a  more  recent  work. 

c.  Authorship  and  Composition. — Now  the  question  arises, 
what  is  the  relation  of  the  first  two  of  these  works  to  one 
another  ?  Is  our  Matthew  simply  a  translation  of  the  Logia 
to  which  Papias  referred?  That  appears  to  have  been 
assumed  in  the  early  Church ;  but  it  cannot  be  the  case. 
For  one  thing,  a  complete  gospel,  with  its  account  of  the 
birth,  life,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Christ,  would  scarcely 
have  such  a  title.  But  the  conclusive  objection  is  that  the 
work  is  manifestly  not  a  translation  from  the  Hebrew,  but 
a  work  originally  composed  in  Greek.     The  style  and  con- 

»  See  Resch,  Agrapha,  pp.  322-342, 


288  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

struction  demand  that  verdict.     In  particular,  quotations  from 

the  O.T.  are  taken  from  the  LXX. 

This  is  not  the  case  universally.  Those  quotations  which  Matthew  has 
in  common  with  one  or  both  of  the  other  synoptics  are  taken  from  the 
LXX. ;  but  those  which  are  found  only  in  Matthew  appear  to  be  translated 
direct  from  the  Hebrew,  a  fact  which  points  to  a  literary  connection 
between  the  gospels,  to  be  considered  in  the  next  chapter.  But  all  the 
proofs  of  that  connection,  which  is  in  Greek,  indicate  that  our  Matthew  is 
not  a  translation  from  Hebrew,  especially  if,  as  will  appear  later,  Matthew 
is  in  part  founded  on  Mark,  certainly  from  the  first  a  Greek  book. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  large  amount  of  space  devoted  to 
the  teachings  of  Jesus  in  Matthew  shows  that  this  subject 
was  especially  important  in  the  estimation  of  the  author. 
The  probability  is  that  the  source  from  which  he  drew  his 
information  concerning  it  was  no  other  than  the  Logia.  If 
our  Matthew  was  largely  dependent  on  that  work,  absorbing 
perhaps  the  greater  part  of  it,  this  gospel  would  naturally 
come  to  be  closely  associated  with  St.  Matthew's  Hebrew  com- 
pilation in  the  minds  of  its  readers.  It  is  possible  to  hold 
that  Matthew  himself  wrote  the  second  book,  in  the  Greek, 
as  well  as  the  Hebrew  Logia.  But  if  we  come  to  see  in 
our  study  of  the  synoptic  problem  that  Mark  was  used  as 
the  groundwork  of  the  gospel,  this  hypothesis  is  not  probable. 
We  cannot  suppose  that  Matthew,  an  apostle  and  an  eye- 
witness, would  resort  to  Mark,  whose  information  was  derived 
second-hand.  Still  St.  Matthew's  name  came  to  be  naturally 
attached  to  the  gospel,  since  it  contains  so  much  of  his 
writing  in  the  reports  of  our  Lord's  discourses— its  most  im- 
portant contents. 

d.  Date  and  Place  of  Origin. — It  has  been  argued  that  this 
gospel  was  written  subsequently  to  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem (a.d.  70)  on  the  ground  that  it  contains  references  to 
that  event  (e.g.^  xxii.  7),  and  also  predictions  of  the  coming  of 
the  Son  of  Man  in  the  generation  then  living  (x.  23,  xvi.  28). 
But  these  are  all  sayings  of  Christ,  and  the  argument  goes  on 
the  assumption  that  our  Lord  could  not  have  foreseen  or  fore- 
told the  events  predicted  in  them.  Now  later  versions  of 
Christ's  teaching  may  indicate  a  consciousness  of  subsequent 
events  on  the  part  of  the  writers  and  editors.     But  the  Ian- 


MATTHEW  289 

guage  in  Matthew  is  quite  general.  A  comparison  with  Luke 
helps  us  here,  (i)  The  eschatological  discourse  in  Matthew 
contains  a  veiled  allusion  to  an  approaching  desecration  de- 
scribed in  words  from  Daniel  as  "  the  abomination  of  desola- 
tion," with  a  parenthetic  remark,  "Let  him  that  readeth 
understand."^  This  points  to  a  time  before  the  event  had 
made  the  meaning  clear,  but  when  hints  were  already  to  be 
seen,  i.e.^  at  the  time  of  the  outbreak  of  the  war.  That  a 
more  distinct  statement  was  natural  after  the  siege  of  Jeru- 
salem is  evident  from  St.  Luke's  version  of  the  discourse. ^ 
(2)  The  blending  of  the  second  coming  of  Christ  with  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  also  points  to  the  earlier  time. 
Accordingly  we  are  led  to  a  date  a  little  before  a.d.  70. 
We  have  no  indication  of  the  place  where  the  gospel  was 
written,  except  that  it  was  not  written  in  Palestine,  which  it 
describes  as  "  that  land  "^  (ix.  26,  31).  The  author  is  writing 
for  Greek -speaking  Jews,  who  need  the  interpretation  of 
Hebrew  words.  Thus  he  interprets  "  Immanuel "  (i.  23), 
"Golgotha"  (xxvii.  33),  and  the  words  of  Christ's  prayer 
(xxvii.  46). 

e.  Contents. 

(i)  Preparation^  i. — iv.  11. 

i.  1-17,  Genealogy  from  Abraham. 

18-25,  Announcement  concerning  Jesus  to  Joseph. 

ii.  1-12,  The  birth  of  Jesus  and  the  visit  of  the  Magi. 

13-23,  Flight  into  Egypt,  massacre  of  the  Bethlehem 
infants,  and  settlement  in  Nazareth. 

iii.  1-12,  The  work  of  John  the  Baptist. 

13-17,  The  baptism  of  Jesus. 

iv.  i-ii,  The  temptation. 

(2)  The  Beginning  of  the  Ministry^  iv.  12-25. 

12-25,  The  commencement  of  our  Lord's  ministry  in 
Galilee ;  the  call  of  the  four  fishermen ;  Jesus  preaching  and 
healing. 

^  This  is  just  the  same  in  Mark  xiii.  14,  showing  that  one  gospel  used 
the  other,  or  that  they  had  a  common  source. 

*  See  Luke  xxi.  20. 

'  ^  7^  iKelvT).    Weiss  suggests  Ephesus. 
U 


290  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(3)  The  Sermon  on  the  Mounts  v.-vii. 
V.  I,  2,  Introductory  description. 
3-12,  The  Beatitudes. 

13-16,  The  disciples  as  salt  and  light. 

17-20,  Jesus  fulfiling  the  law,  and  expecting  higher  righteous- 
ness than  that  of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees. 

21-48,  The  new  teaching  concerning  murder  and  hatred, 
adultery  and  lust,  swearing,  revenge. 

vi.  1-18,  Against  hypocrisy  in  almsgiving;  in  prayer — 
with  the  opposite  example  of  the  Lord's  Prayer;  in 
fasting. 

19-34,  Against  the  worldliness  of  Mammon  worship,  and 
anxiety  for  material  things ;  Nature  teaching  trust  in  God ; 
the  call  to  seek  first  His  kingdom. 

vii.  1-5,  Judging  and  censoriousness  forbidden. 

6,  Discrimination  to  be  observed  in  communicating  the 
treasures  of  the  kingdom. 

7-12,  Encouragements  to  prayer. 

13,  14,  The  two  ways. 

15-23,  False  prophets,  and  how  to  detect  them. 

24-29,  The  two  houses  ;  and  the  effect  of  the  discourse  on 
the  people. 

(4)  The  Ministry  at  Capernaum  and  by  the  Lake^  viii.-xiv. 
viii.  1-4,  Cleansing  of  a  leper. 

5-13,  Cure  of  the  servant  of  a  centurion  at  Capernaum. 

14-17,  Cure  of  Peter's  wife's  mother. 

18-22,  Two  would-be  disciples  discouraged. 

23-27,  The  storm  calmed. 

28-34,  The  two  Gadarene  demoniacs  cured,  and  the  herd 
of  swine  perishing  in  the  sea. 

An  instance  of  Matthew's  couples  ;   Mark  has  one  demoniac  (v.  2), 

ix.  1-8,  Cure  of  the  sick  of  the  palsy. 

9,  Call  of  Matthew  from  the  place  of  toll. 

10-13,  Christ  sitting  at  table  with  publicans  and  sinners. 

14-17,  Christ's  disciples  accused  of  not  fasting;  His  de- 
fence of  them. 

18-26,  The  cure  of  the  woman  who  touched  Jesus'  garment, 


MATTHEW  291 

and  the  raising  to  life  of  the  daughter  of  the  ruler  of  the 
synagogue. 

27-31,  Two  blind  men  receive  their  sight. 

32-34,  A  dumb  man  cured ;  Jesus  accused  of  working  in 
league  with  the  prince  of  the  demons. 

35-x.  I,  Jesus'  compassion  for  the  multitude. 

X.  2-xi.  I,  The  twelve  apostles ;  and  the  charge  to  them. 

xi.  2-19,  Opinions  about  John  and  Jesus. 

20-24,  Lament  over  Chorazin,  Bethsaida,  and  Capernaum. 

25-30,  Thanksgiving  for  the  revelation  to  babes,  and  invita- 
tion to  the  heavy-laden. 

Note  the  peculiar  Johannine  style  here. 

xii.  1-8,  The  disciples  plucking  ears  of  corn  on  the  Sabbath, 
and  Christ's  defence  of  them. 

9-21,  Jesus  curing  the  man  with  the  withered  hand  on  the 
Sabbath  day ;  His  mission  of  mercy  predicted  by  Isaiah. 

22-37,  Cure  of  a  blind  and  dumb  demoniac;  the  charge  of 
Satanic  influence ;  blasphemy  against  the  Spirit. 

38-42,  Seeking  after  a  sign. 

43-45,  The  house  swept  and  garnished. 

46-50,  Who  are  Christ's  mother  and  His  brethren  ? 

xiii.  1-52,  A  group  of  parables  about  the  kingdom — the 
sower,  the  tares,  the  mustard  seed,  leaven,  the  treasure  hid  in 
a  field,  the  pearl  of  great  price,  the  net ;  concluding  with  the 
well-furnished  scribe. 

53-58,  Jesus  in  His  own  country. 

xiv.  i-i  2,  The  murder  of  John  the  Baptist. 

13-21,  The  feeding  of  the  five  thousand. 

22-33,  Christ  and  Peter  walking  on  the  sea. 

34-36,  Healing  the  sick  in  Gennesaret. 

(5)  Retirement  to  Remote  Districts  and  more  Private  Ministry^ 
xv.-xviii. 

XV.  1-20,  Objection  to  the  disciples  not  washing  cere- 
moniously ;  answered  by  Christ. 

21-28,  The  Canaanite  woman. 

29-39,  The  feeding  of  the  four  thousand. 

Many  take  this  as  another  version  of  the  feeding  of  the  5,000  (Schleier« 
macher,  Neander,  Wendt,  Weiss,  Beyschlag,  Holtzmann,  &c.). 


292  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

xvi.  I-I2,  The  Sadducees  seeking  a  sign;  leaven  of  the 
Pharisees  and  Sadducees. 

13-28,  Peter's  confession  of  Christ,  and  His  first  prediction 
of  His  death. 

xvii.  1-13,  The  transfiguration. 

14-23,  The  lunatic  boy  j  Christ's  second  prediction  of  His 
betrayal  and  death. 

24-27,  The  shekel  in  the  fish's  mouth. 

xviii.  1-14,  On  the  treatment  of  children,  and  Christ  saving 
the  lost  sheep. 

15-35,  Treatment  of  an  offending  brother;  the  limits  of 
forgiveness  and  the  parable  of  the  wicked  servant. 

{6)  Jesus  east  of  the  Jordan,  xix.,  xx. 

xix.  1-12,  Jesus  forbidding  divorce. 

13-15,  Jesus  blessing  children. 

16-22,  The  young  man  who  refused  to  give  up  all  for  Christ. 

23-xx.  16,  The  difficulty  of  a  rich  man  entering  the  king- 
dom ;  and  the  parable  of  the  labourers. 

17-28,  Christ's  third  prediction  of  His  death,  followed  by 
the  request  of  the  mother  of  Zebedee's  children. 

29-34,  The  two  blind  men  of  Jericho. 

Another  of  Matthew's  doublets.     Cf,  Mark  x.  46  ;  Luke  xviii.  35. 

(7)  The  Last  Days  in  Jerusalem,  xxi.-xxv. 

xxi.  1-17,  The  triumphant  entry;  the  cleansing  of  the 
temple. 

18-22,  The  withered  fig-tree  and  the  power  of  faith. 

23-32,  Christ  challenged  for  His  authority;  His  reply 
challenge. 

33-46,  The  parable  of  the  vineyard. 

xxii.  1-14,  The  marriage  feast. 

15-46,  Questions  to  entrap  Christ :  (a)  the  Pharisees'  and 
the  Herodians'  question  on  the  lawfulness  of  paying  tribute 
to  Caesar;  (/?)  the  Sadducees'  question  on  marriage  and  the 
future  life ;  (7)  the  lawyer's  question  on  the  commandments ; 
(8)  Christ's  question  about  David's  son. 

xxiii.  1-12,  On  not  seeking  the  chief  places. 

13-36,  Denunciation  of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees. 


MATTHEW  293 

37-39,  Lament  over  Jerusalem. 

xxiv.,  Apocalyptic  prediction  of  the  coming  woes,  and  warn- 
ings to  escape. 

XXV.,  Parables  of  judgment — the  ten  virgins;  the  talents; 
the  sheep  and  the  goats. 

(8)  The  Passioriy  Deaths  and  Resurrection  of  Jesus ^  xxvi.- 
xxviii. 

xxvi.  1-5,  Decision  of  the  council  about  the  arrest  of 
Jesus. 

6-13,  The  woman  with  the  cruse  of  ointment. 

14-16,  Judas'  bargain  to  betray  Christ  for  money. 

^y-SSj  The  Passover,  the  indication  of  the  traitor,  the 
Lord's  Supper,  and  the  warning  of  Peter's  denial. 

36-56,  Jesus  in  Gethsemane,  betrayed  and  arrested. 

57-68,  The  trial  before  Caiaphas. 

69-75,  Peter's  denial  of  Christ. 

xxvii.  I,  2,  Jesus  delivered  to  Pilate. 

3-10,  Judas'  repentance  and  suicide. 

1 1-3 1,  Jesus  tried  by  Pilate ;  the  release  of  Barabbas;  Jesus 
mocked. 

32-56,  The  crucifixion  and  death  of  Jesus. 

57-61,  Joseph  of  Arimathaea  and  the  burial  of  Jesus. 

62-66,  Pilate  grants  a  guard  for  the  tomb. 

xxviii.  I -10,  The  women  at  the  sepulchre;  the  angel;  Jesus 
meeting  them. 

11-15,  The  guard  bribed  to  keep  silence. 

16-20,  Jesus  meeting  the  eleven  in  Galilee;  His  com- 
mission to  them  to  evangelise  the  world. 

f.  Characteristics. — This  gospel  is  more  Hebraistic  than  the 
other  synoptics  :  (i)  In  language  the  Greek  follows  Hebrew 
idioms  more  closely.  Thus  here  we  have  the  expression  *'  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,"  while  not  only  in  the  other  gospels, 
but  everywhere  else  in  the  N.T.  we  read  "the  kingdom  of 
God,"  an  instance  of  the  Jewish  reluctance  to  use  the  name 
of  God.  Quotations  from  the  O.T.,  not  found  in  the  parallel 
gospels,  are  made  direct  from  the  Hebrew,  not  taken  from  the 
LXX.     (2)  The  standpoint  of  the  writer  and  the  atmosphere 


294  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

of  his  ideas  are  largely  Jewish.  While  St.  Luke  traces  the 
genealogy  of  Christ  back  to  Adam,  in  our  gospel  it  com- 
mences with  Abraham ;  and  the  names  are  arranged  in  three 
groups  of  fourteen  (/>.,  3  of  twice  7 — both  sacred  numbers  in 
the  O.T.),  an  arrangement  not  adopted  in  Luke.  Then  our 
1  ord's  most  explicit  statements  on  the  authority  of  the  Law 
/appear  only  in  this  gospel.  It  is  here  only  that  we  read  "I 
did  not  come  to  destroy  the  Law,  but  to  fulfil  it "  (Matthew  v. 
17^),  followed  by  a  severe  condemnation  of  anyone  who 
breaks  the  smallest  of  the  commandments.  Matthew  only 
gives  in  the  commission  to  the  Twelve  the  direction,  "  Go  not 
into  any  way  of  the  Gentiles,  and  enter  not  into  any  city  of  the 
Samaritans :  but  go  rather  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel"  (x.  6,  7);  in  the  conversation  mth  the  Canaanite^ 
woman,  the  sentence,  "  I  was  not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep 
of  the  house  of  Israel "  (xv.  24) ;  and  after  our  Lord's  descrip- 
tion of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  as  sitting  in  the  seat  of 
Moses,  the  remarkable  direction,  "All  things  therefore 
whatsoever  they  bid  you,  these  do  and  observe."  (xxiii.  3.) 
Jerusalem  is  the  holy  city  (iv.  5,  xxvii.  53).  Lastly  the 
author  frequently  quotes  the  O.T,  especially  prophecies,  the 
fulfilment  of  which  he  sees  in  Christ. 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  far  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
extreme  Judaisers,  St.  Paul's  opponents,  «>.,  the  party  of 
James ;  for  it  has  strong  words  in  condemnation  of  the  Jews, 
and  definite  commendations  of  the  Gentiles.  Matthew  alone 
gives  the  account  of  the  homage  of  the  Gentiles  in  the  visit 
of  the  Magi  to  the  infant  Christ  (ii.  1-12).  In  this  gospel  we 
have  warm  praise  of  a  Roman  centurion's  faith,  with  the  com- 
ment, "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  I  have  not  found  so  great  faith, 
no,  not  in  Israel.  And  I  say  unto  you,  that  many  shall  come 
from  the  east  and  the  west,  and  shall  sit  down  with  Abraham, 
and  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  :  but  the  sons 
of  the  kingdom  2  shall  be  cast  forth  into  the  outer  darkness, 

*  Luke  xvi.  17  is  parallel  to  what  follows  in  Matt.,  but  much  briefer. 
'  A  more  Hebraistic  designation  than  Mark's  "  Syro-Phcenician." 
3  Note  the  Hebraism  of  /orm-^*'  sons  of  the  kingdom." 


MARK  29s 

etc."  (viii.  10-12.)  Matthew  gives  the  parable  of  the  vine- 
yard with  the  concluding  words,  "Therefore  say  I  unto  you, 
the  kingdom  of  God  shall  be  taken  away  from  you,  and  shall 
be  given  to  a  nation  bringing  forth  the  fruits  thereof"  (xxi.  43); 
and  he  ends  his  gospel  with  the  words  of  the  great  commission 
to  "Make  disciples  of  all  the  nations."  (xxviii.  19,  20.) 

Pfleiderer  holds  these  two  positions  to  be  absolutely  contradictory,  and 
he  would  explain  the  phenomena  on  the  hypothesis  that  the  gospel 
was  originally  a  strongly  Jewish  writing,  and  that  Pauline  and  anti- 
Jewish  ideas  were  brought  into  it  by  the  insertion  of  certain  sentences 
later  when  it  fell  into  the  hands  of  some  editor  of  the  opposite  school 
to  that  of  its  author.^  But  this  is  to  ignore  the  purposely  paradoxical 
methods  of  Christ's  preaching.  There  is  no  real  contradiction  between 
the  two  sets  of  sayings.  Each  represents  a  phase  in  our  Lord's  teaching. 
His  immediate  mission  was  to  Israel,  and  so  was  that  of  the  Twelve ;  He 
claimed  the  spirit  of  the  law,  and  developed  it.  But  it  is  a  denial  of  the 
N.T.  portrait  of  Christ  to  assert  that  the  world-wide  aims  of  the  gospel 
were  not  in  the  mind  of  its  Founder. 

3.  Mark. 

a.  S^.  Mark  the  Evangelist. — John  Mark  was  the  son  of 
one  of  the  N.T.  Marys — probably  a  woman  of  some  position, 
as  the  Jerusalem  Church  met  in  her  house  (Acts  xii.  12) — 
and  a  nephew  of  Barnabas  (Colossians  iv.  10.)  It  has 
been  suggested  that  he  was  the  young  man  whose  presence 
in  the  garden  he  mentions  so  curiously  (Mark  xiv.  51,  52); 
but,  as  far  as  we  know,  he  was  not  a  personal  follower  of 
our  Lord.  Still  he  was  one  of  the  early  Christians  at 
Jerusalem,  for  he  was  there  during  the  famine  (a.d.  45-6) ; 
and  Barnabas,  who  came  up  to  the  city  with  Saul  carrying 
presents  from  Antioch,  took  him  to  the  Syrian  capital  on 
the  return  journey.  He  accompanied  these  two  on  what 
is  called  St.  Paul's  "First  Missionary  Journey,"  but  left 
them  at  Perga,  in  Pamphylia,  when  the  apostle  determined 
to  extend  it  beyond  the  Taurus  Mountains.  Since  St.  Paul 
was  annoyed  at  this  action — though,  as  Professor  Ramsay 
shows,  it  was  not  altogether  unreasonable  ^ — and  refused  to 
have  him  on  the  next  journey,  Barnabas  took  him  to  his 

*  Urchristenihum,  pp.  540,  541. 

*  St.  Paul  the  Traveller,  p.  90. 


296  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

own  home  in  Cyprus  (xv.  39).  We  have  no  account  of 
his  subsequent  movements.  According  to  tradition  he  was 
the  founder  of  the  church  at  Alexandria.^  His  evangelistic 
work  in  Egypt  may  have  occupied  the  interval  between 
A.D.  50  and  A.D.  62.  Near  the  latter  date  we  find  him 
with  St.  Paul  at  Rome  (Colossians  iv.  10),  a  fact  showing  the 
apostle  to  be  reconciled  to  him,  and  honoured  as  a  "  fellow 
worker."  (Philemon  24.)  In  i  Peter  he  appears  as  an  intimate 
disciple  of  St.  Peter,  for  that  apostle  calls  him  "  My  son  " 

(v.  13). 

b.  Mark  and  Peter.  —  It  has  been  common  to  treat  the 
second  gospel  as  virtually  Peter's.  The  reason  for  doing  so 
is  that  several  writers  of  very  early  dates  associate  the  name 
of  Peter  with  Mark  in  connection  with  it,  telling  us  that 
Mark  wrote  what  he  had  heard  Peter  teach.  The  chief 
witness  is  Papias,  who  gives  us  his  information  on  older 
authority,  ascribing  it  to  the  elders  from  whom  he  had 
learnt.  Other  authorities  are  Irenseus,  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria, TertuUian,  and  Origen.  Justin  Martyr  refers  to  the 
"  Memoirs  of  Peter  "  when  giving  a  statement  found  in  Mark 
iii.  17.2 

Papias  writes:  *'And  the  Elder  said  this  also:  Mark,  having  become 
the  interpreter  {ep/xTjvevTiqs)  of  Peter,  wrote  down  accurately  everything 
that  he  remembered,  without,  however,  recording  in  order  (ov  fi^vroi  rd^ei) 
what  was  either  said  or  done  by  Christ.  For  neither  did  he  hear  the 
Lord,  nor  did  he  follow  Him  ;  but  afterwards,  as  I  said,  he  attended 
Peter,  who  adapted  his  instructions  to  the  needs  of  his  hearers,  but 
had  no  design  of  giving  a  connected  account  of  the  Lord's  words  {X&yojv). 
So  then  Mark  made  no  mistake,  while  he  thus  wrote  down  some  things  as 
he  remembered  them  ;  for  he  made  it  his  own  care  not  to  omit  anything 
that  he  heard,  or  to  set  down  any  false  statement  therein."  (Eusebius, 
H.E.f  iii.  39.)  One  or  two  questions  arise  here:  (i)  In  what  sense 
was  Mark  an  interpreter  of  Peter?  Possibly  the  reference  is  simply 
to  his  work  as  a  catechist  explaining  the  discourses  to  the  hearers.  But 
the  usual  sense  of  the  word  would  point  to  linguistic  interpretation.  This 
is  how  it  is  employed  by  St.  Paul  when  referring  to  the  unknown  tongues. 
(i  Corinthians  xiv.  28.)  Therefore  the  meaning  may  be  that  Mark,  who 
had  Hellenistic  connections,  e,g.  with  Barnabas,  translated  Peter's  Aramaic 
utterances  into  Greek.*    (2)   What  does   Papias  mean  by  saying  that 

1  Eusebius,  H.E.^  ii.  16.  ^  Xryph.  106. 

3  Not  Latin ;  Greek  would  be  used  for  religious  instruction  at  Rome  in 
these  times.    See  Swete,  St.  Mark^  xix.,  xx. 


MARK  297 

the  gospel  was  *'  not  in  order "  ?  This  may  refer  to  a  break  with 
chronology,  and  Lightfoot  suggested  that  Papias  had  in  mind  John's 
order,  which  is  different  in  many  respects  from  Mark's.^  But  it  may 
be  that  Papias  meant  that  this  gospel  was  not  a  systematic  history,  not 
a  complete  biography,  but  a  book,  the  contents  of  which  were  selected 
with  a  view  to  the  profit  of  the  readers.^ 

Irenaeus  writes :  "  Matthew  also  issued  a  written  gospel  among  the 
Hebrews  in  their  own  dialect,  while  Peter  and  Paul  were  preaching  at 
Rome,  and  laying  foundations  of  the  church.  After  their  departure  (^f  o5of ), 
Mark,  the  disciple  and  interpreter  of  Peter,  delivered  to  us  in  writing 
the  things  that  had  been  preached  by  Peter  (rcl  vir6  U^rpov  KTjpvaad/xeva)." 
(Adv.  Haer,^  iii.  i.)  Possibly  Irenaeus  is  dependent  on  Papias  ;  but  he  adds 
to  what  we  have  from  Papias  the  statement  that  the  gospel  was  written 
after  the  death  of  Peter  and  Paul,  and  he  more  definitely  fixes  the  form  of 
the  source  as  what  Peter  preached. 

Of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Eusebius  says  :  "  In  the  same  books 
Clement  has  given  a  tradition  concerning  the  order  of  the  gospels 
which  he  had  received  from  the  presbyters  of  old  {aviKo.Q^v)^  and  which 
is  to  this  effect :  He  says  that  the  gospels  containing  the  genealogies 
were  written  first ;  that  the  occasion  of  writing  the  gospel  according  to 
Mark  was  this :  Peter  having  publicly  preached  the  word  at  Rome, 
and  having  spoken  the  gospel  by  the  Spirit,  many  present  exhorted  Mark 
to  write  the  things  which  had  been  spoken  since  he  had  long  accompanied 
Peter,  and  remembered  what  he  had  said  ;  and  that  when  he  had  composed 
the  gospel,  he  delivered  it  to  them  who  had  asked  it  of  him.  Which 
when  Peter  knew,  he  neither  forbad  nor  encouraged  it."  (Eusebius,  H.E.y 
vi.  14.)  Here  we  may  notice  that  Clement  relies  on  tradition  from  elders 
of  a  long  time  back.  Agreeing  with  Papias  and  Irenseus  in  the  main, 
he  contradicts  the  latter  in  one  respect,  viz.,  in  dating  the  composition 
of  the  gospel  during  the  lifetime  of  Peter,  while  Irenaeus  sets  it  after 
Peter's  death.  Irenseus  is  more  definite,  and  probably  it  is  he  who  is 
correct.  Then  Origen  says  :  "  Mark  wrote  it  as  Peter  directed  him  "  (ws 
\\.krpo%  v<pT)yfi(raTo  aiJry),  thus  supporting  Clement  (Eusebius,  H.E.^ 
vi.  25);  and  Tertullian  says:  "The  gospel  published  by  Mark  may  be 
called  Peter's,  whose  interpreter  {interpres)  Mark  was."  {Adv.  Marcion^ 
iv.  5. )    Moreover,  this  ancient  testimony  is  without  contradiction. 

c.  Genuineness  atid  HistoricUy. — Pfleiderer,  while  accepting 
St.  Mark  as  the  author  of  our  gospel,  denies  his  connection 
with  St.  Peter  partly  on  the  ground  that  the  gospel  contains 
miracles,  of  which  the  apostle,  an  eye-witness,  of  course  knew 
nothing.^  This  is  high-handed  criticism  indeed.  The  most 
conclusive  evidence  is  to  be  set  aside,  because  it  does  not 
agree  with  the  non-miraculous  theory  of  the  universe.     Only 

*  Essays  on  Supernatural  Religion ^  p.  165. 

*  See  SWETE,  XX.,  xxi. 

*  Urchristenthum^  p,  414.. 


298  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

a  disciple  of  Hume  could  admit  such  an  argument.  But 
another  point  of  Pfleiderer's  has  been  perceived  by  many. 
The  gospel  has  not  the  aspect  of  discourses,  because  it  is 
almost  confined  to  narrative  matter.  Now  it  may  well  be 
allowed  that  Mark,  when  sitting  down  to  the  task  of  writing 
his  gospel,  did  not  confine  himself  exclusively  to  what  he 
had  heard  Peter  utter  in  public  preaching.  Besides,  what 
he  had  learnt  in  this  way  would  be  used  by  him  as  material 
for  a  composition  in  his  own  words  and  style.  Certainly 
the  gospel  does  not  consist  merely  of  a  reporter's  notes  of 
sermons.  We  need  not  demand  that  it  should,  in  order, 
satisfy  the  requirements  of  the  patristic  statements  about  it. 
And  then  it  is  reasonable  to  think  that  Peter  did  repeat  many 
stories  of  his  Master's  life.  That  would  be  a  very  real  way 
of  preaching  Christ,  the  best  way  for  making  Christ  known. 
A  brief  notice  of  one  of  his  sermons  which  is  given  in  Acts 
represents  him  as  saying  that  Jesus  "  went  about  doing  good  " 
(Acts  X.  38),  a  phrase  just  on  the  lines  of  the  gospel  according 
to  St.  Mark,  which  would  serve  well  as  a  summary  of  that 
gospel.  Then  it  has  been  objected  that  the  phrase  "  not  in 
order"  does  not  apply  to  Mark,  which  is  the  most  orderly 
of  the  gospels,  and  which  is  chronologically  arranged.  But 
the  expression  may  mean,  "not  as  a  set  historical  composition," 
and  further,  in  point  of  fact  it  is  not  entirely  chronological. 
For  example,  it  gives  five  occasions  of  offence  to  the  Jewish 
authorities  on  the  part  of  Jesus  in  immediate  succession 
(ii.  i-iii.  6).  It  is  hardly  likely  that  they  occurred  thus 
closely  together ;  possibly  we  have  here  the  grouping  in  one 
of  Peter's  sermons  on  the  subject. 

We  cannot  reasonably  doubt  that  our  Mark  is  the  book 
to  which  the  patristic  references  apply.  It  was  well  known 
to  Irenseus  as  one  of  the  four  gospels,  and  his  frequent  citations 
remove  all  doubt  on  the  point  as  far  as  he  is  concerned. 
But  Irenseus's  Mark  cannot  be  other  than  Papias's  Mark, 
though  probably  it  has  undergone  re-editing.  The  connection 
of  time,  locality,  and  association  between  the  two  Fathers  is 
too  close.      Probably  our  gospel  was  one  of  Justin  Martyr's 


MARK  299 

Memoirs  of  the  Apostles^  for  Justin  gives  words  that  occur  in 
Mark  only.^     Possibly  it  was  known  to  Hermas.^ 

d.  Date  and  Place  of  Origin^  and  Destination. — As  we  do 
not  know  the  date  of  St.  Peter's  death,  neither  the  statement 
of  Irenaeus  nor  that  of  Clement  will  help  us  much  in  fixing 
the  date  of  this  gospel.  Still,  since  it  is  probable  that  St.  Peter 
was  living  at  least  as  late  as  the  Neronian  persecution,  and  since 
it  is  also  probable  that  Irenaeus  is  right,  and  that  St.  Mark  did 
not  write  down  his  recollections  of  the  apostle's  preaching  till 
that  was  completed,  it  is  not  likely  that  the  gospel  was  composed 
before  about  a.d.  65.  At  all  events  it  must  have  been  after 
Colossians,  which  was  written  when  Mark  was  with  Paul  at 
Rome,  for  there  is  no  indication  in  the  epistle  of  his  being 
with  Peter  also  then.  Peter's  coming  to  Rome  therefore  must 
be  later  than  62,  and  the  reports  of  the  preaching  some  time 
after  that.  On  the  other  hand,  as  in  the  case  of  Matthew, 
probably  we  should  not  assign  the  gospel  to  a  time  subsequent 
to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The  same  argument  from 
the  contrast  with  the  reference  to  that  event  in  the  apocalyptic 
discourse  applies  here  also.^  Moreover,  if  Mark  was  used  as 
a  basis  of  Matthew,  it  must  be  earlier.  Thus  we  come  back 
to  about  A.D.  65  or  at  latest  66.  There  is  no  reason  to  deny 
the  ancient  tradition  that  it  was  written  in  Rome.  It  contains 
several  Latinisms.^  Evidently  it  was  intended  for  Gentiles 
who  were  not  familiar  with  Jewish  customs,  for  it  explains  some 
of  those  customs,  e.g.,  the  custom  of  Purification  (vii.  4). 

e.  Contents. 

(i)  Introduction^  i.  1-13. 
i,  1-8,  The  mission  of  John  the  Baptist. 
9-13,  The  baptism  and  temptation  of  Jesus. 
(2)  Early  Afifiistry  in  Galilee,  i.  14-iii.  12. 

*  rov  ^oavefyyii,  6  iffTiv  viol  ^povrrji,  in  Tryph,  io6,  and  there  attributed 
to  the  Memoirs  of  Peter  is  only  found  in  Mark  iii,  17  (though  with  the 
spelling  ^oaPTjpyis). 

2  See  Taylor,  }Vitness  of  Hernias,  p.  5  ff. 

3  See  page  289. 

*  e.g.  J  Latin  words — drjvdpiov,  Kevrvptuv,  KoSpdvrrjs,  Kpd^aTTOi,  \eynhv, 
ki(TTr}s,  arreKovXarup ;  and  such  phrases  as  /ca/cws  ^x^ptcs,  icxdrui  (x^i. 


300  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

i.  14-28,  Commencement  of  the  ministry;  preaching  in  the 
synagogue  at  Capernaum  ;  demoniac  cured. 

29-34,  Cure  of  Peter's  wife's  mother,  followed  by  many 
miracles  of  healing. 

35-45,  A  leper  cleansed. 

ii.  i-iii.  6,  Successive  grounds  of  offence :  (a)  claim  to  for- 
give sins  when  curing  a  paralytic;  (P)  eating  with  publicans 
and  sinners  after  the  call  of  Levi ;  (7)  permitting  the  disciples 
not  to  fast ;  (S)  permitting  the  disciples  to  break  the  Sabbath 
by  plucking  corn ;  (c)  Jesus  Himself  breaking  the  Sabbath  in 
curing  a  man  with  a  withered  hand  on  that  day. 

iii.  7-12,  Jesus  with  the  multitudes  by  the  seaside. 

(3)  More  advanced  Galilean  Ministry^  iii.  13-vii.  23. 

This  is  characterised  by  fuller  teaching  on  the  manner  in  which  the 
kingdom  comes,  and  by  greater  wonders. 

iii.  13-19,  The  call  of  the  Twelve. 

20-30,  Jesus  accused  of  alliance  with  Satan ;  His  answer ; 
the  unpardonable  sin. 

31-35,  Christ's  mother  and  His  brethren. 

iv.  1-34,  A  group  of  parables  about  the  kingdom :  the 
sower,  the  lamp,  seed  growing  automatically,  the  mustard 
seed. 

The  "  seed  growing  automatically  "  is  only  in  Mark. 

35-41,  The  storm  calmed. 

v.  1-20,  The  Gerasene  demoniac  and  the  swine. 

21-43,  The  cure  of  the  woman  who  touched  Christ's  gar- 
ment, and  the  raising  of  Jairus's  daughter. 

vi.  1-6,  Jesus  rejected  at  Nazareth. 

7-13,  The  mission  of  the  Twelve. 

14-29,  The  murder  of  John  the  Baptist. 

30-44,  The  feeding  of  the  five  thousand. 

45-56,  Christ  walking  on  the  sea ;  His  return  to  Gennesaret ; 
many  cures. 

vii.  1-23,  Defilement  from  within,  not  from  without. 

(4)  Retirement  before  Opposition,  and  Further  Teaching  of  tht 
Select  Few,  vii.  24-ix. 


MARK  301 

vii.  24-37,  The  Syro-Phoenician  woman;  the  deaf  mute. 

viii.  1-2 1,  The  feeding  of  the  four  thousand;  leaven. 

22-26,  A  bUnd  man  at  Bethsaida  seeing  men  as  trees. 

This  incident  and  that  of  "  the  deaf  mute  "  (vii.  24-37)  only  in  Mark. 

27-ix.  I,  Peter's  confession  at  Csesarea,  and  Christ's  first 
announcement  of  His  death. 

ix.  2-32,  The  transfiguration;  cure  of  the  lunatic  boy; 
Christ's  second  announcement  of  His  death. 

33-50,  The  example  of  the  Httle  child,  and  the  evil  of 
causing  a  little  one  to  stumble. 

(5)  Christ  in  Percea^  x. 

X.  i-io,  Jesus  forbidding  divorce. 

13-16,  Jesus  blessing  children. 

17-22,  The  young  man  who  refused  to  give  up  all  for  Christ. 

23-31,  The  difficulty  of  a  rich  man  entering  the  kingdom. 

32-45,  Christ's  third  prediction  of  His  death,  followed  by  the 
ambitious  request  of  Zebedee's  sons,  and  His  announcement  of 
His  mission  to  serve,  and  to  give  His  life  a  ransom  for  many. 

46-52,  Bartimaeus  at  Jericho  cured  of  his  blindness. 

(6)  The  Last  Days  in  Jerusalem^  xi.-xvi. 
xi.  i-ii.  The  triumphant  entry. 

12-26,  The  withered  fig  tree,  the  cleansing  of  the  temple, 
the  power  of  faith,  and  the  duty  of  forgiveness. 

27-33,  Christ  challenged  for  His  authority;  His  reply 
challenge. 

xii.  1-12,  The  parable  of  the  vineyard. 

13-40,  Questions  to  entrap  Christ :  (a)  the  Pharisees'  and 
Herodians'  question  on  the  lawfulness  of  paying  tribute  to 
Caesar;  {fi)  the  Sadducees'  question  on  marriage  and  the 
future  life;  (7)  the  scribe's  question  on  the  commandments; 
(8)  Christ's  question  about  David's  son,  and  warning  against 
the  scribes. 

41-44,  The  widow's  mites. 

xiii..  Apocalyptic  predictions  of  coming  woes,  and  warnings 
to  escape. 

xiv.  I,  2,  Decision  of  the  council  about  the  arrest  of  Jesus. 

3-9,  The  woman  with  the  cruse  of  ointment. 


302  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

lo,  II,  Judas  bargaining  to  betray  Jesus  for  money. 

12-31,  The  Passover,  the  indication  of  the  traitor,  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  the  warning  of  Peter's  denial. 

32-52,  Gethsemane,  the  betrayal,  and  the  arrest. 

53-65,  The  trial  of  Jesus  before  the  council. 

66-72,  Peter's  denial  of  Christ. 

XV.  1-15,  The  trial  before  Pilate  and  the  release  of 
Barabbas. 

16-20,  The  mockery. 

21-47,  The  crucifixion,  death,  and  burial  of  Jesus. 

xvi.  1-8,  The  women  at  the  empty  tomb. 

9-20,  Appendix  with  summary  of  resurrection  appearances. 

The  Concluding  Section. — This  section  (verses  9-20)  is  bracketed  by 
Westcott  and  Hort,  and  is  rejected  by  many  critics  as  not  a  part  of 
the  original  text.  The  reasons  for  that  judgment  are  both  documentary 
and  intrinsic :  ( i )  Documentary.  The  section  is  not  found  in  the  two 
oldest  MSS.  (N  and  B).  An  old  Latin  MS.  k.  and  some  Armenian  and 
^Ethiopian  MSS.  are  also  wanting  in  it,  Eusebius  and  Jerome  both 
say  that  it  was  absent  from  many  MSS.,  and  Dr.  Hort  suggests  that 
perhaps  Eusebius  rested  on  the  authority  of  Origcn  in  his  doubts  con- 
cerning the  passage.  The  * '  Eusebian  canons  "  ■^  end  at  verse  8.  Neither 
Justin  Martyr  nor  Clement  of  Alexandria  make  any  reference  to  the 
contents  of  these  verses.  (2)  Intrinsic.  The  most  serious  objections  arise 
from  a  consideration  of  the  verses  themselves :  (a)  We  meet  with  several 
words  not  usual  in  Mark.  Thus  ^/cet/'os  occurs  five  times  in  this  short 
section  in  an  unusual  sense,  without  any  emphasis;  vope^ofjiai  occurs 
three  times,  though  it  is  used  nowhere  else  in  the  gospel ;  and  ideddrj 
twice.  (jS)  Verse  18  contains  marvels  that  suggest  a  later  age.  (7)  Mary 
Magdalene  is  introduced  with  a  description  identifying  her  as  one  * '  from 
whom  He  had  cast  out  seven  devils  "  (verse  9) ;  and  yet  she  had  already 
appeared  twice  before  in  the  narrative  (xv.  47,  xvi.  i).  Surely  this 
fact  alone  must  suggest  that  we  have  here  an  alien  document.  (5)  Jesus 
is  seen  in  Jerusalem  ;  but  according  to  the  earlier  narrative  the  angel 
bade  the  disciples  go  to  Galilee  to  meet  Him.  That  a  few  verses  after  that 
statement  He  should  be  described  as  manifesting  Himself  to  one  of  the 
women  who  heard  it  on  the  very  same  morning,  without  any  explanation 
of  the  change  of  place,  is  improbable,  (e)  Then  the  whole  structure  of 
the  passage  is  unlike  Mark.  In  place  of  the  full  graphic  style  of  the 
gospel  we  have  bald  summaries  of  events.  But  when  we  examine  these 
summaries,  we  find  that  they  add  nothing  to  our  knowledge.  They  could 
all  have  been  based  on  the  other  gospels. 

Verse  9  rests  on  John  xx.  14  and  Luke  viii.  2. 

Verses  9,  10  are  a  natural  inference. 

Verses  12,  13  are  an  abridgment  of  the  Emmaus  incident  of  Luke 

^  The  Eusebian  canons  are  parallel  lists  of  passages  in  the  three  gospels 
constructed  for  cross  reference,  in  the  form  of  a  harmony. 


MARK  303 

xxiv.  13-35.  The  expression,  "in  another  form,"  is  suggested  by  the 
fact  that  the  two  disciples  did  not  recognise  the  Risen  Christ. 

Verse  14  could  be  founded  on  Luke  xxiv.  36-43,  or  on  John  xx.  26-29. 

Verse  15  reminds  us  of  Matthew  xxviii.  19. 

Verse  16  has  no  parallel  in  the  gospels,  but  it  has  a  late  character. 
Jesus  never  required  baptism  as  a  condition  of  salvation. 

Verses  17  and  18  also  read  like  late  legendary  matter. 

Verse  19  points  to  St.  Luke's  account  of  the  ascension. 

Verse  20  is  a  summary  of  the  history  in  Acts.^ 

With  these  objections  against  it,  although  nearly  all  the  MSS.  contain 
the  passage,  it  must  be  held  to  be  not  original. ^  A  few  later  MSS. 
have  another  ending,  viz.  :  "And  they  reported  briefly  to  Peter  and 
those  in  his  company  all  the  things  commanded.  And  after  these  things 
Jesus  Himself  also  sent  forth  through  them  from  the  east  even  to  the 
west  the  holy  and  incorruptible  message  of  eternal  salvation."  This 
is  evidently  a  late  conclusion,  added  to  round  off  the  work.  Certainly 
the  gospel  did  not  end  originally  at  verse  8.  No  one  would  finish  with  the 
Greek  words  icpop^ovPTo  ydp.  Even  the  MS.  B,  which  has  neither  con- 
clusion, leaves  a  blank  space  between  these  words  and  the  beginning 
of  Luke.  We  must  consider,  then,  that  the  original  conclusion  was  early 
lost,  perhaps  the  final  page  accidentally  torn  out  of  the  autograph. 

f.  Characteristics. — St.  Mark's  style  is  essentially  graphic. 
He,  more  than  either  of  the  other  two  synoptic  authors,  writes 
like  an  eye-witness.  This  suggests  his  fidelity  in  reproducing 
St.  Peter's  vivid  impressions.  He  has  an  eye  for  the  concrete. 
He  loves  colour,  and  sees  it  {e.g,^  vi.  39.)  So  freshly  does 
he  realise  his  narrative,  that  at  times  he  gives  us  the  sharp 
abruptness  of  the  original  dialogue  in  startling  fashion,  as 
for  instance,  "  What  is  this  ?  A  new  teaching !  With  authority 
he  commandeth  even  the  unclean  spirits,"  etc.  (i.  27.,  R.V.). 
His  language,  though  not  so  Hebraistic  as  Matthew,  is  still 
much  influenced  by  Hebrew  phrases. 

Especially  note  the  use  of  iyhero,  for  "it  came  to  pass" ;  the  idiom 
Sio  8vo  for  "two  by  two,"  similarly  a-v/Mirdaia  crv/j.-Trdata,  irpacrial  Trpaaial; 
the  simple  linking  together  of  sentences  with  "and,"  instead  of  by  the 
varied  connections  of  classic  Greek. 

The  gospel  omits  the  narratives  of  the  infancy,  only  briefly 

^  The  result  of  this  analysis  is  against  accepting  Mr.  Conybeare's 
suggestion  that  the  passage  was  written  by  Aristion,  on  the  authority 
of  an  Armenian  MS.  (a.d.  986),  which  assigns  it  to  the  presbyter  Ariston. 
Papias  describes  Aristion  as  an  immediate  disciple  of  our  Lord.  (Eusebius, 
H.E.f  iii.  39.)  Would  such  a  man  make  a  mere  summary  of  statements  in 
the  gospels,  many  of  them  second  and  third  hand  statements  ? 

'  The  integrity  of  the  passage  was  vehemently  defended  by  Dean 
Burgon,  On  the  last  twelve  verses  of  St.  Mark, 


304  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

touches  on  the  temptation,  and  is  chiefly  devoted  to  the 
active  works  of  Jesus  in  His  Galilean  ministry.  It  gives 
much  less  space  to  the  teaching  of  Christ  than  Matthew 
and  Luke,  and  it  dwells  at  length  on  the  miracles,  devoting 
special  attention  to  those  that  concern  demoniacal  possession. 

4.  Luke. 

a.  SL  Luke  the  Evangelist — It  appears  from  Colossians  iv. 
14  that  St.  Luke  was  a  Gentile,  as  his  name  is  not  included  in 
the  list  of  "  those  of  the  circumcision."  From  the  same  pas- 
sage we  learn  that  he  was  a  physician.  The  mention  of  his 
name  here  and  in  Philemon  24,  shows  that  he  was  with  St. 
Paul  during  at  least  part  of  the  first  imprisonment  at  Rome. 
The  only  other  occasion  in  which  his  name  occurs  in  the  N.T. 
is  at  2  Timothy  iv.  11,  where  we  find  him  again  with  the 
apostle,  this  time  during  the  second  imprisonment,^  and  as 
the  only  faithful  attendant  after  all  others  had  forsaken  Paul. 
Thus  we  discover  his  close  relations  with  the  apostle.  Then, 
granting  that  he  was  the  author  of  the  passages  in  Acts, 
written  in  the  first  person  plural,^  we  are  able  to  carry  our 
information  further  back.  There  we  learn  that  he  accom- 
panied the  apostle  from  Troas  to  Philippi,  when  St.  Paul 
made  his  first  journey  in  Europe  (Acts  xvi.  10-17).  The 
resumption  of  the  narrative  in  the  third  person  implies  that 
the  apostle  left  him  at  Philippi.  About  six  years  later  Paul 
was  again  at  Philippi,  and  there  he  again  met  Luke,  who  then 
travelled  with  him  to  Jerusalem — as  the  resumption  of  the 
"we"  narrative  implies  (xx.  5-xxi.  18);  he  also  accompanied 
the  apostle  in  the  voyage  to  Rome,  sharing  the  experience  of 
the  shipwreck  at  Malta  on  the  way.  An  ancient  legend^  re- 
presents him  as  a  painter.  His  symbol  in  Christian  Art  is  the 
ox  or  the  calf. 

b.  Authorship  of  the  Gospel. — From  the  second  century 
downwards  the  third  gospel  was  assigned  to  Luke.     There  is 

*  ».«.,  on  the  hypothesis  that  2  Timothy  belongs  to  a  second  imprison- 
ment.    See  chapter  viii.  ^  See  page  342. 

'  First  found  in  Theodore,  a  reader  at  Constantinople  in  the  sixth 
century.     Migne,  Patr,  Gr.,  Ixxxvi.  165. 


LUKE  305 

no  evidence  to  indicate  that  this  claim  was  ever  disputed. 
No  other  name  was  ever  proposed.  The  first  references  to 
St.  Luke's  name  as  that  of  the  author  of  the  gospel  are  in 
Irenaeus  and  the  Muratorian  Fragment,  Then  we  have 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  TertuUian,  etc.,  writing  of  the  gospel 
as  Luke's. 

Thus  Irenzeus  writes  :  **  Luke,  also,  the  companion  of  Paul,  recorded 
in  a  book  the  gospel  preached  by  him "  (Adv.  Haer. ,  iii.  i ;  see  also  a 
fuller  account  in  iii.  14).  Here  we  have  the  earliest  reference  to 
the  relation  of  St.  Paul  to  the  third  gospel.  Undoubtedly  it  obtained 
authority  in  the  churches  owing  to  the  connection  of  Paul  with  Luke,  as 
the  second  gospel  obtained  it  through  Peter's  relations  with  Mark,  so  that 
all  four  gospels  were  accredited  with  apostolic  authority.  But  we  cannot 
regard  the  cases  as  parallel,  seeing  that  Paul  was  not,  like  Peter,  a  witness 
of  the  events  of  our  Lord's  life  and  work,  and  the  preface  to  the  third 
gospel  shows  that  its  author  sought  information  from  eye-witnesses.  The 
gospel  can  only  be  traced  to  St.  Paul  in  the  spirit  of  it.' 

The  Mu7'atorian  Fragment  has  the  phrase,  "The  third  book  of  the 
gospel,  that  according  to  Luke." '  For  the  testimony  of  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  see  Eusebius,  H.E.^  vi.  14;  for  Tertullian's,  see  Adv,  Marcion^ 
iv.  2  and  5  j  for  Origen's,  see  Eusebius,  H.E.^  vi.  25,  etc. 

c.  Genuineness, — There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  references 
of  Irenaeus  and  later  fathers  to  St.  Luke  are  directed  to  our 
gospel;  the  citations  prove  it.  We  cannot  go  further  back 
with  the  name,  but  the  very  fact  that  so  obscure  a  person  is 
unanimously  indicated  speaks  for  genuineness.  There  would 
be  no  motive  to  select  a  scarcely  known  personage  for  the 
purpose  of  pseudonymous  writing.  And  the  history  of  the 
gospel  itself  is  older  than  these  references.  It  is  used  in 
Tatian's  harmony,  as  we  can  now  see  for  ourselves.^  There- 
fore it  must  have  been  recognised  and  read  in  the  churches  of 
Syria  soon  after  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  The 
presence  of  it  in  the  Peshitto  witnesses  to  the  same  fact.  It 
seems  to  have  been  one  of  the  "  Memoirs  of  the  Apostles  " 
used  by  Justin  Martyr. 

^  When  St.  Paul  says  "My  gospel"  [e>g.^  Rom,  ii.  16),  he  cannot  mean 
our  third  gospel  or  any  other  written  narrative.  Any  idea  of  the  kind  is 
an  anachronism.  The  reference  must  be  to  the  message  he  delivered,  the 
good  tidings  he  proclaimed,  especially  to  righteousness  and  life  in  Christ, 
through  the  cross,  and  by  faith. 

2  In  barbarous  Latin— tertio  euangelii  LIBRUM  SECUNDO  lucan. 

2  See  The  Earliest  Life  of  Christy  etc. 


306  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Thus  Justin  mentions  several  facts  only  found  in  this  gospel,  e.g.^ 
"  Elizabeth  as  the  mother  of  the  Baptist,  the  sending  of  Gabriel  to  Mary, 
the  census  under  Quirinius,  there  being  no  room  in  the  inn,  Jesus'  ministry 
beginning  when  He  was  30  years  old,  His  being  sent  by  Pilate  to  Herod, 
His  last  cry, ' Father,  into  thy  hands  I  commend  my  spirit '"  ( i  Apol.  xxxiv. ; 
Tryph.,  Ixxviii.,  Ixxxvi.,  c,  ciii.,  cv.,  cvi.).^ 

Celsus  must  have  known  the  third  gospel,  as  he  refers  to  the 
genealogy  representing  Jesus  as  descended  from  the  first  man 
(Origen,  Con.  Cels.  ii.  32).  In  the  epistle  of  the  churches  of 
Lyons  and  Vienne  there  is  a  quotation  from  this  gospel.^ 
It  also  seems  to  have  been  referred  to  in  the  Clementine 
Homilies,  commented  on  by  Heracleon,  and  known  to 
Basilides  and  Valentinus.  It  may  be  referred  to  by  Hermas,^ 
but  we  cannot  trace  it  with  confidence  to  any  of  the  Apostolic 
Fathers,  though  it  seems  to  have  been  known  to  the  author  of 
the  Didachk.'^  Its  private  dedication  suggests  that  it  was  not 
at  first  intended  for  the  churches,  and  this  fact  may  account 
for  its  not  being  so  much  used  in  the  earliest  times  as 
Matthew. 

d.  Marcion^s   Gospel. — The   most  important   testimony  to 

the  antiquity  of  our  third  gospel  is  to  be  found  in  the  use  of 

it  by  Marcion.     This   great  reformer  and   heretic  came   to 

Rome  about  a.d.   140,  with  a   N.T.  of  his  own  selection, 

consisting  of  one  gospel  and  ten  epistles.     The  title  of  the 

gospel  gives  us  no  indication  of  its  authorship,  as  Marcion 

simply  calls  it  "the  gospel  of  the  Lord"  or  "the  gospel  of 

Christ."     But  an  examination  of  its  contents,  most  of  which 

can  be  recovered  from  TertuUian,  shows  that  it  was  founded 

on   Luke.      This  is  a  very  important  fact  as  regards  the 

antiquity  and  the  early  recognition  of  the  authority  of  our 

gospel. 

Baur  held  that  Marcion's  gospel  was  the  original,  a  Pauline  gospel, 
which  the  writer  of  Luke  had  softened  down  to  suit  Catholic  ideas ;  but 
this  opinion  once  held  by  the  Tubingen  School  was  given  up  by  Baur's 
successor,  Hilgenfeld,  who  showed  that  Luke  was  the  original.  Ritschl 
too  contended  for  the  priority  of  Luke,  which  is  now  generally  admitted. 
None  of  the  fathers  mention  Marcion's  gospel  as  used  by  any  but  his  own 

1  Plummer,  Intemat.  Crit.  Com.,  St.  Luke,  p.  xv. 

^  See  EusEBius,  H.E.,  v.  i,  compared  with  Luke  i.  6,  67. 

3  See  Taylor,  The  Witness  of  Hermas,  p.  34.  ^  xvi.  i. 


LUKE  307 

followers.  Its  omissions  and  alterations  can  be  perfectly  accounted  for 
as  made  in  order  to  bring  the  gospel  into  harmony  with  Marcion's  teach- 
ings. Thus  Luke  i.  and  ii.  with  the  accounts  of  the  infancy,  and  the 
genealogy  and  the  temptation  from  chapters  iii.  and  iv.,  are  omitted  as  in- 
consistent with  Marcion's  docetism.  For  Luke  xiii.  28,  instead  of  "  Abra- 
ham, Isaac,  and  Jacob,"  we  have  "the  righteous" ;  and  at  xvi.  17,  Marcion's 
gospel  reads,  "It  is  easier  for  heaven  and  earth,  the  law  and  the  prophets, 
to  Ml  than  one  tittle  of  the  word  of  the  Lord  " — alterations  made  to  suit 
his  gnostic  anti-Judaism. 

e.  Tke  Preface. — Luke  opens  with  an  elaborate  dedication 
to  a  person  of  high  rank — as  the  title  "most  excellent"  in- 
dicates ^  — bearing  the  name  Theophilus.  We  have  no  means 
of  knowing  who  this  man  was,  but  it  is  not  probable  that  the 
name  is  fictitious,  to  designate  "  the  pious  reader."  The  title 
of  rank  is  against  that  idea.  In  this  dedication  the  evangelist 
states  both  the  occasion  which  led  him  to  write  the  gospel, 
and  the  method  he  pursued  in  preparing  himself  for  the  task. 
He  tells  us  that  many  had  taken  in  hand  to  draw  up  a  narra- 
tive "  of  the  gospel  occurrences."  There  is  no  ground  for  the 
assumption  that  either  Matthew  or  Mark  is  here  referred  to. 
The  surprising  thing  is  that  even  as  early  as  St.  Luke's  time 
there  were  already  tnany  attempts  at  the  writing  of  gospels. 
St.  Luke  does  not  directly  condemn  these  attempts,  or  profess, 
as  is  sometimes  assumed,  to  correct  and  supersede  them.  The 
form  of  his  language  only  implies  emulation  to  follow  the 
example  of  others,  with  an  excuse  for  writing  in  that  example. 
Still  the  tone  and  spirit  of  the  preface  do  certainly  suggest  a 
depreciatory  regard  for  the  earlier  attempts.  The  expression 
"taken  in  hand"  implies  as  much;  and  the  indefinite  "many" 
without  giving  any  names — as  though  he  had  said  "  gospels  by 
the  cart-load" — also  suggests  that  no  high  value  was  set  on 
the  works.  Still  more,  St.  Luke's  careful  declaration  of  his  own 
method  of  work  cannot  but  suggest  his  belief  that  no  such 
pains  had  been  taken  by  his  predecessors.  He  here  informs 
us  first  that  the  narrative  is  to  deal  with  what  had  been 
received  from  "eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word" — 
people  who  had  seen  the  events  described,  and  had  themselves 

*  Strictly  speaking  it  belongs  to  a  man  of  the  Equestrian  Order.  See 
Ramsay,  St.  Paul^  etc.,  p.  388  (i). 


308  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

taken  part  in  them.  These  must  be  disciples  who  accom- 
panied our  Lord  on  His  travels.  Then  he  says  he  "traced 
the  course  of  all  things  accurately  from  the  first,"  a  claim  to 
diligent  searching  and  careful  observation,  the  conscientious 
work  of  a  trained  and  disciplined  mind.  There  is  no  excuse 
for  doubting  St.  Luke's  good  faith,  when  he  comes  thus  before 
us  claiming  our  confidence  in  him  as  a  trustworthy  historian. 

It  is  true  St.  Luke's  words  do  not  necessarily  imply  that  in  every  case 
he  took  his  facts  from  the  lips  of  the  witnesses.  The  phrase,  ''as  they 
delivered  (irap^doaav)  them  unto  us,"  would  apply  to  tradition.  But  the 
whole  passage  shows  that  the  author  took  pains  to  obtain  the  most  accurate 
information,  and  he  was  contemporary  with  many  of  the  witnesses.  He 
does  not  say  whether  he  received  his  information  orally  or  in  writing. 
We  shall  see  in  the  next  chapter  that  he  used  written  material,  and  that 
these  were  not  all  first  hand.  What  he  assures  us  is  that  he  was  careful 
to  get  what  had  been  testified  to  by  the  men  who  took  part  in  the  events 
recorded. 

Tke  Difficulty  of  the  Census. — St.  Luke  tells  us  that  a  decree  went 
out  from  Csesar  Augustus  for  a  universal  census  ;  that  the  first  census  took 
place  when  Quirinius  was  governor  of  Syria ;  that  every  one  went  to  his 
own  city  for  this  object ;  and  that  thus  Joseph  and  Mary  went  up  to 
Bethlehem  (ii.  1-4).  Several  objections  have  been  raised  against  these 
statements,  (i)  Herod  was  reigning  as  king,  and  his  subjects  would  not 
come  into  a  Roman  census.  (2)  A  Roman  census  goes  by  households,  not 
by  family  relations  and  pedigrees.  (3)  No  census  of  the  Roman  empire 
occurred  at  the  time  when  Jesus  was  born,  though  there  was  a  census 
under  Quirinius  in  A.D.  6.  (4)  Quirinius  was  not  governor  of  Syria  when 
Jesus  was  born  ;  his  administration  was  from  A.D.  6  to  9,  and  Quinctilius 
Varus  was  then  governor  of  Syria.  These  difficulties  have  been  consider- 
ably lightened  by  recent  researches.  The  following  points  may  now  be 
urged  in  defence  of  St.  Luke's  correctness; — (i)  In  the  year  8-7  B.C., 
Augustus  wrote  a  letter  to  Herod  informing  him  that  whereas  he  had 
regarded  him  hitherto  as  a  friend,  henceforth  he  would  treat  him  as  a 
subject.  From  that  time  Herod's  dominions  would  be  an  integral  part  of 
the  Roman  empire.  (2)  Herod  would  administer  the  census  on  Jewish 
lines  to  conciliate  his  people.  (3)  Documents  recently  discovered  in  Egypt 
have  made  it  clear  that  periodical  enrolments  were  carried  on  in  that 
province  every  fourteen  years,  and  working  back  from  those  that  are 
referred  to  in  these  records,  we  come  to  the  year  8-7  B.C.  for  one  of  these 
Egyptian  censuses.  It  is  likely  enough  that  the  letter  to  Herod  would  be 
followed  by  the  extension  of  the  census  to  Palestine,  and  thus  a  little  later 
than  in  Egypt.  But  the  new  Dictionary  of  the  Bible  on  independent 
grounds  fixes  the  year  6  B.C.  for  the  birth  of  Jesus,  which  exactly  coincides 
with  this  date  of  the  census.  (4)  St.  Luke  does  not  use  the  substantive 
"governor"  or  ^^ legate"  {ijyejxiby),  but  the  verb  in  the  participle,  "acting 
as  leader"  {iiyefJioveijovTos).  Now  it  is  known  that  before  the  death  of 
Herod,  Quirinius  was  engaged  in  a  war  among  the  Taurus  mountains, 
that  affected  the  foreign  relations  of  Syria.  Professor  Ramsiiy  argues  that 
it  is  the  military  position  of  Quirinius  that  is  referred  to  by  St.  Luke. 


LUKE  309 

Momtnsen  argued  that  Quirinius  was  twice  legate  of  Syria  on  the 
evidence  of  an  anonymous  marble  inscription  found  in  the  Tiber  in  the 
year  1764,  which  records  the  career  of  a  high  officer  who  twice  governed 
Syria  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  though  his  name  has  not  been  preserved. 
It  is  difficult  to  find  a  time  when  Quirinius  could  have  held  the  legate's  office 
twice.  Professor  Ramsay  assigns  the  first  governing  to  the  military  posi- 
tion he  held  in  the  war.^  At  all  events  St.  Luke's  historicity  is  considerably 
vindicated. 

f.  Date  and  Place  of  Origin. — The  gospel  must  have  been 
written  before  Acts,  as  it  is  referred  to  in  that  work.  (Acts 
i.  I,  2.)  If  therefore  Acts  were  written  at  the  time  when 
the  history  of  it  ends  (a.d.  62),  Luke  would  be  earlier  than 
that  date.  But  there  is  no  reason  to  assign  the  later  work 
to  the  time  when  the  events  in  the  narrative  cease,  and 
there  are  strong  reasons  for  giving  both  Acts  and  the  gospel 
a  later  date.  If  St.  Luke  used  Mark,^  the  latest  date  for  Mark 
must  precede  the  earliest  for  Luke.  Then  a  comparison  of  Luke 
with  the  other  two  synoptics  shows  that  while  they  seem  to 
have  been  written  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  the  Third 
Gospel  was  written  after  that  event.  In  our  Lord's  apocalyptic 
discourse  in  place  of  obscure  allusions  to  "the  abomination 
of  desolation,"  etc.  with  the  writer's  comment,  "Let  him 
that  readeth  understand,"  we  have  a  clear  description  of 
the  siege  and  its  issue.  (Luke  xxi.  20,  24.)  And  further, 
while  the  final  judgment  is  associated  with  the  doom  of 
Jerusalem  in  the  other  synoptics,  in  Luke  it  is  distinguished 
from  the  local  event,  and  a  vague  interval  placed  between 
the  two  in  the  statement,  "And  Jerusalem  shall  be  trodden 
down  of  the  Gentiles,  until  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  be 
fulfilled."  (Luke  xxi.  24.)  On  the  other  hand,  if  St.  Luke 
wrote  the  gospel,  we  cannot  assign  to  it  a  very  late  date, 
for  even  if  he  lived  to  a  great  age,  it  is  not  likely  that 
he  would  have  postponed  so  important  a  work  to  the  end 
of  his  life. 3  And  then  it  precedes  Acts.  Perhaps  the  nearest 
we  can  come  to  the  date  is  to  suggest  about  a.d.  75.     There 

1  See  Ramsay,  Was  Christ  born  at  Bethlehem  ? 
'  See  next  chapter. 

'  The  case  of  St.  John  with  his  reflective  gospel  is  quite  different,  and 
by  contrast  confirms  the  earlier  date  of  Luke. 


310  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

is  no  evidence  concerning  the  place  of  origin.    St.  Luke's  con- 
nection with  Philippi  suggests  that  city. 

g.  Contents. 

(i)  Preface,  i.  1-4. 

(2)  The  Infancy,  i.  5-ii. 

i.  5-25,  Prediction  of  the  birth  of  John  the  Baptist. 

26-38,  The  annunciation. 

39-56,  Mary's  visit  to  Elizabeth ;  the  Magnificat. 

57-80,  Birth  of  John  the  Baptist;  Zacharias'  psalm  of 
praise. 

ii.  1-7,  The  birth  of  Jesus. 

8-20,  The  shepherds  and  the  angels. 

21-40,  The  circumcision  and  dedication  of  Jesus;  Simeon 
and  Anna. 

41-52,  The  boyhood  of  Jesus;  visit  to  the  Temple. 

(3)  T/ie  Preparation,  iii.-iv.  13. 

iii.  1-22,  The  ministry  of  John  the  Baptist  and  his  baptism 
of  Jesus. 

23-38,  Genealogy. 

iv.  1--13,  The  temptation. 

(4)  Galilean  Ministry,  iv.  14-ix.  50. 

iv.  14-30,  Commencement  of  preaching;  rejection  at 
Nazareth. 

31-44,  Jesus  at  Capernaum;  deliverance  of  demoniac; 
cure  of  Peter's  wife's  mother;  other  miracles  and  preaching. 

V.  i-ii,  The  miraculous  draught  of  fishes  and  the  call  of 
Simon. 

12-16,  A  leper  cleansed. 

17-vi.  II,  Grounds  of  offence:  (a)  Christ's  claim  to  forgive 
sins  when  curing  a  paralytic;  {p)  call  of  Levi,  and  Christ 
eating  and  drinking  with  publicans  and  sinners;  (y)  Christ's 
disciples  not  fasting;  (S)  the  disciples  plucking  corn  on  the 
Sabbath;  («)  Jesus  curing  a  man's  withered  hand  on  the 
Sabbath. 

vi.  1 2-1 9,  The  appointment  of  the  Twelve,  and  the  coming 
together  of  the  multitude  for  healing. 

20-49,  The  sermon  in  the  plain:  (a)  Beatitudes  and  woes; 


LUKE  311 

(/?)  the  duty  of  forgiveness  and  mercy ;  (y)  against  fault-find- 
ing ;  (6)  two  houses. 

vii.  i-io,  Cure  of  a  centurion's  servant  at  Capernaum. 

11-17,  Raising  of  the  son  of  the  widow  at  Nain. 

18-35,  John  the  Baptist's  question;  Christ's  answer;  and 
descriptions  of  John  and  of  the  age  that  rejected  both  Christ 
and  John. 

36-50,  The  penitent ;  parable  of  two  debtors. 

viii.  1-3,  The  ministering  women. 

4-18,  Parables  of  the  sower  and  the  lamp. 

19-21,  Christ's  mother  and  His  brethren. 

22-25,  The  storm  calmed. 

26-39,  The  demoniac  and  the  swine. 

40-56,  The  cure  of  the  woman  who  touched  the  border  of 
Christ's  garment,  and  the  raising  of  the  ruler's  daughter. 

ix.  1-6,  The  mission  of  the  Twelve. 

7-9,  Herod's  perplexity. 

10-17,  Christ  feeding  the  multitude. 

18-27,  Peter's  confession,  followed  by  Christ's  first  an- 
nouncement of  His  death. 

28-45,  Transfiguration,  followed  by  the  cure  of  a  lunatic 
boy,  and  Christ's  second  announcement  of  His  death. 

46-48,  Ambition  rebuked  from  the  example  of  a  child. 

49,  50,  John  rebuked  for  rebuking  an  unattached  believer. 

(5)  Later  Ministry^  chiefly  outside  Galilee^  ix.  51-xix.  28. 

ix.  51-56,  Jesus  rejected  by  the  Samaritans. 

57-62,  Discouragements  of  discipleship. 

x.  1-16,  Mission  of  the  seventy  with  lament  over  the  cities 
of  Galilee. 

17-24,  Return  of  the  seventy  and  Christ's  thanksgiving. 

25-37,  The  lawyer's  question  and  the  parable  of  the  Good 
Samaritan. 

38-42,  Mary  and  Martha. 

xi.  1-13,  The  Lord's  prayer  and  lessons  on  prayer. 

14-26,  Jesus  charged  with  alliance  with  Beelzebub;  His 
reply. 

27,  28,  The  woman  who  blessed  Christ's  mother. 


312  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

29-36,  On  seeking  a  sign  ;  the  lamp  and  the  bushel. 

37-54,  Denunciation  of  Pharisees  and  lawyers. 

xii.  1-12,  Leaven  of  the  Pharisees;  confidence  in  God; 
blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Spirit. 

13-21,  Covetousness ;  the  rich  fool. 

22-34,  Anxiety  allayed. 

35-59,  Watchfulness  and  diligence ;  signs  of  the  times. 

xiii.  1-9,  The  meaning  of  calamities ;  the  fruitless  figtree. 

10-17,  An  infirm  woman  cured  on  the  Sabbath. 

18-21,  The  mustard  seed  and  the  leaven. 

22-35,  Gentiles  coming  in  place  of  Jews;  lament  over 
Jerusalem. 

xiv.  1-6,  Lawfulness  of  heaUng  on  the  Sabbath,  in  the  case 
of  a  man  with  dropsy. 

7-14,  On  taking  the  lowest  place,  and  inviting  the  poor  for 
guests. 

15-24,  The  parable  of  the  supper. 

25-35,  Counting  the  cost. 

XV.,  Parables  of  the  lost  sheep,  the  lost  piece  of  silver,  the 
prodigal  son. 

xvi.  1-13,  The  unrighteous  steward;  the  use  and  abuse  of 
mammon. 

14-18,  The  law  not  to  fail. 

19-31,  The  rich  man  and  Lazarus. 

xvii.  1-4,  Occasions  of  stumbling ;  the  offending  brother. 

5-10,  Faith  and  service. 

1 1 -1 9,  The  ten  lepers. 

20-37,  The  kingdom  of  heaven  now  in  our  midst;  the 
coming  days  of  the  Son  of  man. 

xviii.  1-8,  The  unjust  judge. 

9-14,  The  Pharisee  and  the  publican  in  prayer. 

15-17,  Jesus  blessing  little  children. 

18-30,  The  young  ruler. 

31-34,  Jesus  declares  that  He  is  now  going  up  to  Jerusalem 
to  suffer  and  die. 

35-43,  The  blind  beggar  at  Jericho  cured. 

xix.  I- 10,  Zacchaeus  the  publican. 


LUKE  313 

11-28,  The  parable  of  the  pounds. 

(6)  The  Last  Days  in  Jerusalem^  xix.  29-xxiv.  53. 

xix.  29-40,  The  triumphant  entry. 

41-48,  Jesus  weeping  over  Jerusalem,  and  cleansing  the 
Temple. 

XX.  1-8,  Christ's  authority  challenged ;  His  question  on  the 
baptism  of  John. 

9-18,  The  parable  of  the  vineyard. 

1 9-47 J  Questions  to  entrap  Christ:  (a)  The  scribes'  and 
priests'  question  about  tribute  to  Caesar :  (/3)  the  Sadducees' 
question  about  marriage  and  the  resurrection;  (7)  Christ's 
question  about  David's  son. 

xxi.  1-4,  The  widow's  mites. 

5-38,  Warnings  of  the  destruction  of  the  Temple ;  the  siege 
and  destruction  of  Jerusalem ;  the  times  of  the  Gentiles ;  the 
final  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man. 

xxii.  1-6,  Judas  covenants  to  betray  Jesus. 

7-23,  The  Passover  and  the  Lord's  Supper. 

24-38,  Ambition  rebuked;  Peter  warned;  all  to  be  pre- 
pared. 

39-5  3>  The  agony  on  the  Mount  of  OHves ;  the  betrayal. 

54-65,  Jesus  arrested;  Peter  denying  his  Master;  Jesus 
mocked. 

66-74,  Trial  before  the  elders. 

xxiii.  1-25,  Jesus  before  Pilate;  sent  to  Herod;  again 
before  Pilate. 

26-31,  Simon  of  Cyrene ;  the  lament  of  the  daughters  of 
Jerusalem. 

32-49,  Jesus  crucified  with  two  malefactors;  death  of 
Jesus. 

50-56,  Joseph  and  the  burial  of  Jesus. 

xxiv.  1-12,  The  women  at  the  tomb;  Peter  also  there. 

13-35,  The  journey  to  Emmaus. 

36-43,  Jesus  appearing  to  His  disciples,  and  eating  fish 
before  them. 

44-49,  His  final  commission. 

50-53,  The  Ascension. 


314  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

h.  Characteristics. — Luke  is  written  in  better  Greek  style 
than  the  other  synoptic  gospels.  The  Preface  is  the  best 
Greek  in  the  N.T.  The  hymns  in  the  earlier  chapters, 
however,  are  thoroughly  Hebraistic  in  style  as  well  as 
thought,  a  clear  sign  that  the  evangelist  did  not  compose 
them  himself,  but  that  he  transferred  them  to  his  pages  in 
the  form  in  which  he  found  them.  The  construction  of 
the  gospel  differs  from  Mark  in  allowing  more  space  to 
the  teachings  of  Jesus,  as  is  the  case  with  Matthew  also; 
but  frequently  it  differs  from  Matthew  in  placing  more  of 
the  sayings  of  Christ  in  direct  connection  with  the  events 
which  furnished  the  occasion  for  uttering  them — Matthew 
having  more  blocks  of  sayings  without  intermediate  narrative. 
Thus  the  sayings  of  Matthew's  "Sermon  on  the  Mount"  are 
distributed  over  two  or  three  portions  of  the  narrative  in 
Luke.  Like  Matthew,  and  unlike  Mark,  Luke  has  an  account 
of  the  infancy  of  Christ,  which  is  much  fuller  in  the  third 
gospel  than  in  the  first;  and  the  association  of  John  the 
Baptist's  birth  is  here  introduced.  Luke  has  a  considerable 
section  of  history  and  some  most  important  teaching 
belonging  to  the  later  part  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  largely 
in  Perea  and  by  the  Jordan,  which  is  not  found  in  the 
other  synoptics — that  containing  the  parables  of  the  lost 
sheep,  the  lost  coin,  the  prodigal  son,  the  unrighteous 
steward,  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus,  the  unrighteous  judge, 
the  Pharisee  and  the  publican,  the  incident  of  the  ten  lepers, 
etc.     This  indicates  some  special  source  of  his  own. 

The  aim  and  purpose  of  the  gospel,  as  the  author  indicates 
in  his  preface,  is  to  give  a  connected  account  of  the  hfe  and 
teachings  of  Christ.  It  has  been  asserted  that  he  has 
manipulated  his  materials  under  the  influence  of  a  doctrinal 
bias,  and  this  in  two  directions :  (i)  Ebionite.  St.  Luke  shows 
especial  sympathy  for  the  poor,  as  for  example  his  version 
of  the  Beatitudes  with  corresponding  woes  for  the  rich 
(vi.  20-26)  and  the  parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus  indicate. 
His  gospel  contains  our  Lord's  sternest  denunciations  of 
the  abuse  of  wealth.     (2)  Pauline.    Many  phrases  in  Luke 


LUKE  315 

resemble    phrases    in    St.    Paul's    writings.^      Tne    Pauline 

liberalism  is  repeatedly  manifested,  and  the  richness  of  the 

doctrine  of  grace  illustrated.     Yet  we  cannot  deny  that  all 

the  facts  were  found  by  St.   Luke  in   the  reports  of  the 

w^ork   and   teaching    of    Christ   that    came    into    his   hands, 

though  he   naturally  looks   at   them  in  his  own  way.     Nor 

are  these  two  elements  contradictory,  as  their  titles   might 

suggest.      Certainly    the    gospel    is    not    anti-Jewish    in    the 

narrow  sense  of  the  term. 

The  early  narratives  commend  O.T.  piety ;  Jesus  is  known  as  the  Son 
of  David  (xviii.  38,  xx.  41) ;  salvation  is  first  for  Israel  (xiii.  16,  xix.  9) ; 
and  the  apostles  are  for  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel  (xxii.  30).' 

Other  characteristics  that  have  been  observed  in  this  gospel 
are  (i)  the  importance  attached  to  prayer  both  in  the  example 
of  Christ  and  in  His  teaching  on  the  subject,  (2)  the  joyous 
tone  that  pervades  the  narrative,  and  the  scope  it  gives  for 
expressions  of  praise  and  thanksgiving,  (3)  the  admirable  narra- 
tive style,  and  character  painting,  as  in  Zacharias,  Anna, 
Zacchaeus,  Herod  Antipas,  (4)  the  writer's  care  to  note  the 
course  of  historical  development — seen  for  instance  in  the 
way  he  marks  the  end  of  the  Galilean  ministry,  and  the 
successive  stages  of  the  journey  up  to  Jerusalem,  (5)  his  fond- 
ness for  domestic  scenes,  such  for  example  as  the  anecdote  of 
Mary  and  Martha.^ 

Blass  holds  that  St.  Luke  issued  two  editions  of  his  gospel — the  first, 
represented  by  the  accepted  text,  for  Palestine  readers  ;  the  second,  when 
at  Rome,  represented  by  the  MS.  D,  for  western  readers.^ 

1  Compare  Luke  iv.  32  with  i  Cor.  ii.  4 ;  vi.  36  with  2  Cor.  i.  3  ; 
vi.  39  with  Rom.  ii.  19;  vi.  48  with  i  Cor.  iii.  10;  vii.  8  with  Rom. 
iii.    i;    viii.    12   with    i    Cor.    i.    21    and   Rom.   i.    16;    viii.    13    with 

1  Thess.  i.  6 ;  x.  7  with  i  Tim.  v.  18 ;  x.  8  with  i  Cor.  x.  27 ; 
X.  16  with  I  Thess.  iv.  8 ;  x.  20  with  Phil.  iv.  3 ;  xi.  7  with  Gal.  iv.  17  ; 
xi.  29  with  I  Cor.  i.  22 ;  xi.  41  with  Tit.  i.  15  ;  xii.  ^5  with  Eph.  vi.  14  ; 
xii.  42  with  I  Cor.  iv.  2 ;  xiii.  27  with  2  Tim.  ii.  19 ;  xviii.  I  with 
Col.  i.  3,  2  Thess.  i.  11,  and  Gal.  vi.  9;  xx.  16  with  Rom.  ix.  14, 
xi.    II,    Gal.    iii.    21;    xx.    22,    25    with    Rom.    xiii.    7;    xx.    35    with 

2  Thess.  i.  5  ;  xx.  38  with  Rom.  vi.  11  and  Gal.  ii.  19;  xxi.  23  with 
1  Thess.  ii.  16 ;  xxi.  24  with  Rom.  xi.  25  ;  xxi.  34  with  i  Thess.  v.  3-5 ; 
xxi.  36  with  Eph.  vi.  18  ;  xxii.  53  with  Col.  i.  13.— See  Plummer,  xlv. 

^  See  Weiss,  JV.T.  Introd.^  ii.  p.  308. 

'  See  Plummer,  p.  xlviii. 

*  Philology  of  the  Gospels ^  chap.  ix. 


CHAPTER  II. 
THE   SYNOPTIC    PROBLEM 

1.  Resemblances.  I  3.  Proposed  Explanations. 

2.  Differences.  j  4.  Probable  Conclusions. 

The  first  three  gospels  are  often  called  "the  synoptics "^ 
from  the  fact  that  they  take  a  common  view  of  the  life  and 
teaching  of  Christ,  in  contrast  with  St.  John's  very  different 
treatment  of  the  subject;  and  the  synoptic  problem  arises 
from  the  complications  of  their  mutual  relationship.  If  they 
invariably  followed  the  same  lines  we  should  naturally  infer, 
either  that  they  were  derived  entirely  from  one  or  more 
common  sources,  or  that  they  were  dependent  one  upon 
another;  and  if  they  moved  in  quite  distinct  planes  we 
should  reckon  them  to  be  independent  and  separate  narra- 
tives. But  the  peculiar  difficulty  of  the  problem  is  found  in 
the  fact  that  neither  of  these  characteristics  is  to  be  observed 
in  them  uniformly  throughout.  For  a  time  two  or  all  three  of 
them  will  run  in  closely  parallel  lines ;  then  for  no  reason  that 
we  can  easily  discover  one  will  suddenly  branch  off  into  a  region 
of  its  own,  to  return  to  its  companions  later  on,  in  the  same 
sudden  style.  Or  all  three  will  diverge  for  a  time  and  go  their 
own  way,  and  then  reunite  either  at  the  same  place  or  one 
after  the  other. 

While  these  variations  necessarily  complicate  the  problem, 
they  supply  us  with  hints  concerning  the  composition  of  the 
gospels  which,  when  followed  up,  may  lead  to  luminous  con- 
clusions. Thus  the  result  of  the  study  of  the  synoptic 
problem  will  be  to  take  us  a  stage  back  towards  the  actual 
*  From  aOv  and  6\j/is. 


THE   RESEMBLANCES  317 

events  by  introducing  us  to  the  original  sources  in  which  the 
evangelists  found  the  materials  for  their  books.  We  have  to 
notice,  therefore,  both  the  resemblances  and  the  differences, 
and  then,  if  possible,  to  account  for  them  and  discover  what 
they  imply. 

I.  The  Resemblances. 

These  may  be  observed  in  the  following  particulars : — 

a.  A  Common  FIa?i. — After  separate  accounts  of  the  infancy 
of  Jesus  in  Matthew  and  Luke,  Mark  joins  them,  and  then  all 
three  give  the  ministry  of  John  the  Baptist,  followed  by  the 
baptism  and  temptation  of  Jesus,  and  the  commencement  of 
His  ministry.  From  this  time  they  rigidly  confine  their  atten- 
tion to  scenes  in  the  north,  although  St.  John  is  able  to 
describe  much  that  happened  in  Judaea  and  Samaria.  More- 
over, they  are  most  explicit  with  regard  to  the  first  year  of  our 
Lord's  public  work,  hurrying  over  the  later  times  till  they 
come  to  the  last  week,  where  all  three  of  them  enter  into  the 
fulness  of  the  details. 

b.  A  Common  Sekctton  of  Incidents. — Although  our  Lord's 
public  ministry  probably  occupied  over  two  years,  during 
which  time  He  would  have  said  and  done  many  things  not 
recorded  in  any  of  our  gospels—as  an  appendix  to  the  fourth 
gospel  recognises  (John  xxi.  25) — the  synoptics  concur  in 
giving  us  many  incidents  in  common.  They  do  not  record 
more  incidents  than  could  have  been  included  in  a  few  weeks 
if  they  all  had  happened  together;  how  is  it  then  that  they 
accept  so  many  of  the  same  incidents  out  of  the  immense 
number  that  filled  the  whole  period  over  which  their  narratives 
are  spread  ? 

If  we  reckon  the  incidents  to  be  88,^  we  find  them  dis- 
tributed as  follows : — 

In  all  three  gospels  .  .  .     42 

In  Mark  and  Matt.  .  .  .12 

In  Mark  and  Luke  .  •  •       5 

In  Matt,  and  Luke  .  .  .12 

Common  Incidents        .        71 
*  This  is  a  slight  modification  of  Dr.  Davidson's  reckoning 


3i8  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Only  in  Mark        .  .  •         •       3 

Only  in  Matt.        .  .  •         •       5 

Only  in  Luke        .  .  .         .       9 

Exclusive  Incidents        .         17 
Total        .        88 

Thus  we  have  nearly  half  the  total  number  of  incidents  in 
each  of  the  synoptics,  7 1  shared  by  at  least  two  gospels,  and  in 
Mark  only  three  which  are  not  also  found  in  one  or  other  of 
the  companion  gospels.     Can  this  be  accidental  ? 

c.  Similar  Groups  of  Seems. — We  often  meet  with  the 
same  succession  of  detached  events  in  two  or  all  three  of 
the  synoptics,  the  same  selection  of  incidents  which  were 
separated  by  intervals  of  time. 

For  example,  the  cure  of  the  paralytic,  the  call  of  Levi,  the  question 
of  fasting  in  all  three  (Matthew  ix.  1-17  ;  Mark  ii.  1-22;  Luke  v.  17-39) ; 
the  cornfield  incident  and  the  cure  of  the  withered  hand — events  separated 
by  a  week  (Matthew  xii.  1-21  ;  Mark  ii.  23-iii.  6  ;  Luke  vi.  i-ii) ;  Jesus 
feeding  the  multitude,  and  walking  on  the  sea,  Peter's  confession  and  the 
transfiguration  and  following  events  (Matthew  xv.  32-xvii.  23 ;  Mark  viii.  i- 
ix.  32,  and  also  Luke  ix.  10-45).  The  third  evangelist  omits  the  walking 
on  the  sea,  but  he  too  brings  the  transfiguration  incident  next  to  St.  Peter's 
confession,  and  yet  he  tells  us  that  there  was  an  interval  of  eight  days 
between  them.  Can  it  be  accidental  that  all  three  synoptic  writers  do  this, 
that  all  of  them  are  silent  on  the  occurrences  of  that  week  of  travel  at  a  most 
critical  time  ?  Still  more  striking  is  the  way  in  which  the  death  of  John 
the  Baptist  is  introduced  alike  by  Matthew  and  Mark  (Matthew  xiv.  3  ; 
Mark  vi.  17).  In  neither  case  does  this  appear  where  the  account  of 
John's  work  is  given,  but  in  both  cases  it  is  brought  in  later,  parentheti- 
cally, to  explain  Herod's  terrors.  Thus  we  read  in  each  of  these  gospels 
that  the  king  hearing  the  fame  of  Jesus,  said  He  was  John  risen  from  the 
dead,  *^for  Herod"  had  arrested  John,  and  so  on,  with  the  ghastly  narra- 
tive of  the  murder,  in  both  cases  introduced  by  way  of  explanation  with 
the  word  "for"  {"yap).  It  is  impossible  to  regard  this  coincidence  as 
accidental. 

d.  Verbal  Agreeme?it. — There  are  many  instances  in  which 
the  gospels  agree  quite  verbally.  This  is  most  frequently  the 
case  in  the  reports  of  sayings  of  Jesus,  as  might  be  expected. 
But  it  is  also  found  in  narrative  passages  where  the  words 
employed  are  not  of  vital  importance.  A  striking  kind  of 
coincidence  is  that  in  which  quotations  from  the  O.T.  are 
found  in  two  gospels  with  the  same  variations  from  the 
LXX 


THE   DIFFERENCES  319 

Matthew  iii.  3,  Mark  i.  3,  and  Luke  iii.  4  have  a  quotation  from 
Isaiah  xl.  3,  in  which  they  agree  word  for  word,  though  at  the  end  they 
depart  from  the  Greek  text  they  are  citing — all  three  having  *'  His  paths" 
tAs  Tpl^ovs  a^oO,  while  the  LXX.,  correctly  following  the  Hebrew  original, 
has  "  the  paths  of  our  God  "  (rds  rpi^ovs  rod  deoO  t]/xC)v).  Dr.  Abbott  has 
drawn  out  a  careful  analysis  of  the  verbal  identities  and  variations  in 
Matthew  xxi.  33-44,  Mark  xii.  i-ii,  Luke  xx.  9-18.^  Similar  results 
will  be  obtained  if  we  make  other  comparisons.  Take  for  instance 
Matthew  ix.  1-8,  Mark  ii.  1-12,  Luke  v.  17-26.  Coming  to  verse  5  in 
Mark  we  find  that  they  verbally  agree  except  that  Matthew  and  Luke 
have  elTra  (in  Luke  elvev)  for  Mark's  X^7et,  a  change  of  no  significance, 
the  words  having  the  same  meaning ;  that  Matthew  adds,  *  *  be  of  good 
cheer"  (Gdpo-ei),  and  that  Luke  omits  Jesus  {o'lrjaoOs),  and  substitutes 
the  less  Hebraistic  "man"  {dvdpcjre)  for  the  "son"  {t^kvov)  in  Matthew 
and  Mark.  That  is  to  say,  except  for  Matthew's  striking  addition,  "be 
of  good  cheer  ! "  we  have  none  but  alterations  such  as  editors  make.  In 
verse  5  Matthew  reads  like  an  abbreviation  of  Mark ;  except  that  he  has 
softened  the  text  by  inserting  "for  "  {y<^p),  every  word  in  Matthew  is  also 
in  Mark.  Turning  to  Luke  we  find  him  word  for  word  as  Matthew, 
except  that  he  has  not  included  Matthew's  added  word  **for,"  but  has 
added  "thee"  (croi),  and  in  one  case  changed  the  order  of  another  word  to 
suit  this  addition  (placing  aov  after  its  substantive).  Then  at  verse  10  in 
Mark  we  have  a  parenthetic  construction  that  is  repeated  in  both  the 
parallels,  and  the  phrases  are  verbally  identical,  except  that  Matthew, 
according  to  his  method,  adds  a  word  {rdre)  to  make  the  style  more 
smooth ;  and  that  Luke  has  one  synonymous  word  variation  {elTrep  again 
for  X^yei). 

2.  The  Differences. 

If  we  only  had  the  agreements  to  consider,  there  would 
not  be  much  difficulty  in  arriving  at  a  satisfactory  solution 
of  the  synoptic  problem.  But  now  we  are  confronted  with 
equally  striking  differences,  and  these  too  have  to  be  accounted 
for. 

a.  Accounts  of  Different  Events. — We  scarcely  need  to 
explain  the  fact  that  some  gospels  give  us  incidents  that 
are  not  recorded  in  other  gospels.  That  is  not  a  difficult 
position  to  face.  The  surprise  is  that  there  are  so  few  cases 
of  solitary  narration. 

b.  Differences  in  the  Several  Accounts  of  the  Same  Events. — 
Occasionally  the  variations  are  too  serious  to  be  set  down  to 
editorial  liberty  in  dealing  with  the  same  materials.  For 
instance,  while  Luke  gives  a  full  and  detailed  narrative  of 
the   birth  of  Christ,   with  clear  statements   about   the    life 

»  See  Encycl,  BrU.^  art.  "Gospels.'* 


320  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

of  Mary  and  Joseph  in  Nazareth  before  that  happened, 
Matthew  betrays  no  knowledge  that  they  had  ever  been  to 
Nazareth  before  the  return  from  Egypt,  when  they  would 
have  gone  back  to  Bethlehem  if  they  had  not  heard  about 
Archelaus,  information  which  induced  them  to  avoid  his 
territory  and  led  to  their  settling  in  Nazareth,  which  city  the 
evangelist  here  introduces  for  the  first  time  into  his  narrative, 
saying  of  Joseph,  "And  being  warned  of  God  in  a  dream, 
he  withdrew  into  the  parts  of  Galilee :  and  came  and  dwelt 
in  a  city  called  Nazareth:  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which 
was  spoken  by  the  prophets,"  etc.  (Matthew  ii.  23.)  Then 
Matthew  and  Luke  give  the  accounts  of  the  second  and 
third  temptations  in  different  order.  (Matthew  iv.  5-1 1; 
Luke  iv.  6-12.)  The  greater  part  of  Luke's  version  of 
Matthew's  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Matthew  v.  i)  is  given 
as  spoken  on  a  level  place  ("and  He  came  down  and 
stood  on  a  level  place"  (Luke  vi.  17) — no  real  contradiction, 
but  a  variation).  Luke's  version  of  the  Beatitudes  reduces 
the  number,  omits  the  more  spiritual  attributes,  and  is 
followed  by  corresponding  denunciation — three  important 
differences  from  Matthew's.  (Luke  vi.  20-26 ;  Matthew 
V.  3-12.)  Other  sayings  from  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
appear  in  various  parts  of  Mark  and  Luke.^  Matthew 
(xiii.  53-58)  and  Mark  (vi.  1-6)  give  the  visit  of  Jesus 
to  Nazareth  and  His  rejection  some  way  on  in  His  ministry 
after  work  in  Capernaum,  etc. ;  Luke  (iv.  16-30)  at  the 
very  commencement,  and  as  the  occasion  of  His  going 
down  to  Capernaum,  apparently  for  the  first  time,  for  he 
adds,  "And  He  came  down  to  Capernaum,  a  city  of  Galilee^^ 
(verse  31).  We  cannot  suppose  them  different  visits,  for  the 
surprise  at  the  carpenter's  son,  the  proverb  about  the  prophet 
not  being  honoured  in  his  own  country,  the  failure  to  work 
miracles,  etc.  occur  in  the  other  two  gospels  accounts  just 

^  In  Mark  iv.  24.  Following  Matthew's  consecutive  order,  we  have 
passages  scattered  over  Luke  as  follows  :  Luke  vi.  20-26  ;  xi.  33  ;  xiv.  34, 
35  ;  xvi.  17  ;  xii.  57-59  ;  xvi.  18  ;  vi.  29,  30;  vi.  27,  28,  32-36 ;  xi.  2-4 ; 
J^ii-  33i  34 ;  xi.  34-36  ;  xvi.  13  ;  xii.  22-31  ;  vi.  37-42 — with  additions  ; 
xi.  9-13 ;  vi.  31 ;  xiii.  23,  24 ;  vi.  43-45 ;  vi.  46;  xiii.  26,  27 ;  vi.  47-49* 


PROPOSED   EXPLANATIONS  321 

as  in  Luke.  Then  Mark  (x.  46)  and  Matthew  (x.  29)  have 
the  cure  of  Bartimaeus  on  the  departure  from  Jericho;  but 
Luke  (xviii.  35 ;  xix.  i)  at  the  entrance  into  the  city.  Con- 
siderable variations  occur  in  the  resurrection  incidents.  In 
particular  we  have  to  notice  that  Matthew  and  Mark  know  of 
no  appearances  in  Jerusalem/  and  only  represent  that  the 
disciples  must  go  to  Gahlee  to  see  Jesus;  but  Luke  gives 
accounts  of  appearances  in  and  near  Jerusalem.  Then 
we  have  Matthew's  curious  couples:  two  demoniacs  (Matt, 
viii.  28) — Mark  (v.  2)  and  Luke  (viii.  27)  have  but  one; 
tivo  bhnd  men  at  Jericho  (Matt.  xx.  30.  cf.  Mark  x.  46,  Luke 
xviii.  35);  the  ass  as  well  as  its  colt  brought  for  the  use  of 
Jesus,  and  the  garments  laid  on  both.  (Matt.  xxi.  7.  cf.  Mark 
xi.  7,  Luke  xix.  35). 

c.  Verbal  Differetices. — These  are  most  striking  where  the 
general  resemblance  is  most  close.  In  the  passages  which  we 
compared  above,  viz.,  Matthew  ix.  1-17,  Mark  ii.  1-23,  Luke 
v.  18-39,  we  saw  some  curious  verbal  modifications  where  the 
sentences  ran  close  together.  But  in  those  very  passages  there 
are  sentences  which  totally  differ. 

Mark  ii.  i  is  quite  different  from  the  parallels  in  Matthew  and  Luke. 
Verse  2  is  not  represented  at  all  in  the  other  gospels ;  at  verse  3  we 
have  great  variation ;  verse  4  is  not  represented  in  Matthew :  in  Luke 
it  is  represented  with  variations ;  verses  6  and  7  are  represented  by 
variations ;  verse  8  is  nearer  to  Luke  than  to  Matthew,  or  than  Matthew  is 
to  Mark  ;^  verses  11,  12,  13  are  also  represented  with  great  variations. 

3.  Proposed  Explanations. 

The  history  of  the  synoptic  problem  reveals  the  greatest 
divergence  of  view  as  to  the  probable  solution  of  it.  Happily 
in  recent  years  those  divergences  have  been  narrowing,  and 
a  nearer  approach  to  a  general  agreement  on  the  question 
has  been  arrived  at  among  critical  students  of  the  gospels. 
The  proposed  hypotheses  group  themselves  in  three  classes : 
(i)  Oral  tradition;  (2)  earlier  sources  in  writing;  (3)  mutual 
dependence.     The  theory  of  oral  tradition  dispenses  with  all 

^  i.e.,  on  the  understanding  that  Mark  xvi.  9-20  is  not  a  part  of  the 
original  gospel.     See  page  302. 

^  e.g. ,  both  have  ^myvoiis,  while  Matthew  has  iSCiv,  and  both  a  form  of 
the  word  diaKoyli^ofiai. 

Y 


322  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

idea  of  literary  connection  between  the  gospels,  taking  their 
agreements  to  come  from  the  fixing  of  the  very  words  of 
tradition,  after  the  methods  of  rabbinical  teaching  common 
among  the  Jews  at  the  time  when  they  were  written,  while 
of  course  it  easily  accounts  for  the  variations  in  the  text. 
The  second  hypothesis — that  of  earlier  sources— looks  for 
these  in  the  allusions  of  Patristic  writers,  such  as  Papias' 
reference  to  Matthew's  Logia,  and  in  the  results  of  an  analysis 
of  the  gospels.  The  theory  of  mutual  dependence  is  of 
course  based  upon  the  latter  process.  According  to  this 
theory  the  earliest  gospel  was  used  by  its  two  successors, 
or  by  the  third  only  through  the  medium  of  the  second. 
It  is  evident  that  these  theories  admit  of  indefinite  modifica- 
tion and  also  of  combination.  It  is  quite  legitimate  to  argue 
that  all  three  processes  were  followed — that  traditions  were 
followed  by  the  writers,  that  there  were  earlier  documents 
which  they  employed,  that  they  used  one  another's  works. 

It  is  no  longer  possible  to  accept  Chrysostom's  comforting  suggestion 
that  the  agreements  between  the  evangelists  prove  their  truthfulness  and 
the  divergences  their  independence.  The  problem  is  too  complicated 
for  that  ready  solution.  Augustin  held  that  each  evangelist  worked  on 
the  production  of  his  predecessor,  and  in  particular  that  Mark  was  an 
abridgment  of  Matthew.  The  latter  position  is  impossible.  Where  they 
are  on  the  same  ground,  Mark  is  fuller  than  Matthew.  In  the  eighteenth 
century,  in  Germany,  Lessing  from  the  world  of  literary  criticism  suggested 
that  the  gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews  lay  behind  our  gospels.  His  idea 
was  taken  up  by  N.T.  students,  and  Eichhorn  proposed  a  primitive  Syro- 
Chaldaic  gospel  as  the  basis.  Then  Marsh,  an  Englishman,  pointed  out 
coincidences  in  the  Greek  that  demanded  an  original  in  that  language, 
with  arguments  which  convinced  Eichhorn,  who  now  modified  his  theory, 
and  added  that  a  Greek  translation  of  his  Syro-Chaldaic  gospel  was  in 
the  hands  of  our  evangelists.  In  the  year  1818  Gieseler,  on  a  suggestion 
of  Herder,  worked  out  the  theory  that  there  was  an  oral  primitive  gospel 
in  Aramaic  (the  modern  name  for  Eichhorn's  Syro-Chaldaic  language), 
i.e.,  a  fixed  tradition  in  set  words,  which  had  been  put  into  Greek  by 
St.  Paul,^  and  afterwards  changed  in  various  ways  by  the  other  apostles. 
Matthew  and  Mark  represent  the  later  apostolic  gospels,  while  Luke 
comes  nearer  the  early  Pauline  form  of  it.  The  great  theologian 
Schleiermacher,  perhaps  the  most  influential  theologian  of  the  century, 
proposed  a  more  scientific  theory:  (i)  The  basis  of  Matthew  was  an 
Aramaic  collection  of  the  sayings  of  Christ,  the  Logia  described  by 
Papias.  (2)  Our  Mark  was  founded  on  an  earlier  work  by  St.  Mark,  the 
"Primitive  Mark"  (UrmarktiSy  of  which  much  has  since  been  heard 

^  Hence  the  expression  * '  my  gospel,"  said  to  be  used  of  this  very  book. 


PROPOSED  EXPLANATIONS  323 

in  later  criticism).  (3)  Luke  was  founded  on  a  series  of  small  frag- 
ments. Credner  followed,  proposing  as  the  basis  of  our  gospels  two 
documents — the  Logia  and  the  Primitive  Mark ;  and  Ewald  carried  the 
analysis  on  further,  elaborating  a  succession  of  writings  in  as  many  as 
nine  stages,  the  last  of  which  is  represented  by  our  gospels.  This  may  be 
regarded  as  the  first  period  of  the  history  of  the  problem  in  modern  times. 
The  second  period  opens  with  the  work  of  Baur  ("epoch-making,"  it 
has  been  repeatedly  called).  The  * '  tendency  "  criticism  of  the  Tubingen 
School,  inaugurated  by  Baur,  and  carried  out  in  some  of  its  details  by 
Schwegler  and  Zeller,  treats  the  gospels  as  artificial  products  of  theological 
prepossessions  in  which  the  history  is  warped  and  coloured  to  suit  the  ideas 
of  the  writers.  Matthew  and  Luke  represent  the  opposition  of  primitive 
apostolic  Christianity  and  Paulinism,  but  weakened  and  modified  by  the 
introduction  of  other  elements,  Matthew  coming  from  a  Petrine  source, 
and  Luke  being  founded  on  Marcion's  gospel,  which  was  strongly  anti- 
Jewish.  Mark  stands  last  as  mediator,  an  entirely  neutral  gospel.  This 
extreme  position  came  to  be  discredited  within  the  school  itself.  It  is 
impossible  to  hold  it  now.  Still  Pfleiderer  in  our  own  day  represents  its 
characteristics  to  some  extent.  Mark  he  takes  to  be  the  earliest  gospel, 
and  a  genuine  work  of  the  man  whose  name  it  bears — a  great  admission 
from  a  leader  of  the  more  radical  criticism.  Luke  comes  next,  founded 
on  Mark,  but  altering  it  to  suit  Pauline  universalism ;  while  Matthew  comes 
last,  based  on  Mark  and  Luke,  and  also  on  some  strongly  Jewish  book, 
probably  The  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews?- 

Pfleiderer  introduces  us  to  the  period  of  contemporary  criticism.  This 
is  marked  by  an  abandonment  of  the  more  extreme  negative  positions  and 
a  remarkable  drawing  together  of  the  radical  and  conservative  schools  on 
ground  which  secures  at  least  the  substantial  historicity  of  the  gospels. 
Among  the  more  recent  continental  writers  the  following  are  especially 
noteworthy : — 

Reuss.'-^ — The  two  primitive  writings  named  by  Papias — "The  Primitive 
Mark  "  and  the  "Logia" — are  the  basis  of  the  gospels.  Our  Mark 
is  based  on  the  "  Primitive  Mark  "  ;  our  Matthew  on  the  Canonical 
Mark  and  the  Logia ;  Luke  on  Matthew  and  special  sources  of  his 
own. 
Weiss.  ^ — First  there  is  the  Logia,  which  contains  incidents  as  well 
as  sayings.  Mark  is  based  on  Peter's  preaching  and  the  Logia ; 
our  Matthew  on  Mark  and  the  Logia ;  Luke  on  Mark,  the  Logia, 
and  other  sources. 
Holtzmann.* — First  we  have  two  primitive  sources — an  original  Mark 
and  the  Logia.  Matthew  and  Luke  are  both  based  on  the  two 
primitive  sources,  but  with  the  use  of  additional  materials.  Later 
Holtzmann  has  agreed  that  our  third  gospel  drew  on  our  first  gospel. 
JUlicher.' — The  earliest  works  are  our  Mark  and  the  Logia  of  Matthew. 
Both  Matthew  and  Luke  use  these ;  but  they  both  also  use  other 
sources.  He  discusses  two  hypotheses,  (i)  Was  Mark  acquainted 
with  the  book  of  the  sayings  of  Jesus  ?    His  answer  is  that  probably 

^   Urchristenthum,  pp.  359-443. 

2  Hist,  of  N.T.  (Eng.  Trans.)  pp.  175  flf. 

*  Introd.,  English  trans.,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  203-239. 

*  Einleitung,  pp.  340-367.  *  Einleitung,  pp.  207-227. 


324  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Mark  knew  it,  and  that  its  existence  was  the  reason  why  he  did  not 
himself  supply  his  own  version  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  but  that 
he  did  not  make  much  use  of  it.  (2)  Was  Luke  dependent  on 
Matthew  ?  The  answer  is  that  if  Matthew  was  the  earlier  book, 
probably  Luke  would  have  seen  it.  But  he  did  not  make  much 
use  of  it. 

Zahn.^ — Matthew's  Hebrew  gospel  comes  first  {c.  A.D.  62),  Mark 
follows  {c.  67),  Luke's  gospel  comes  next  {c.  75),  and  finally  the 
Greek  Matthew  {c.  80). 

Among  English  writers  the  following  may  be  noticed  : — 

Bishop  Westcott — In  his  work  on  the  gospels  supporting  the  theory  of 
oral  tradition  and  documentary  independence. 

Abbott.' — By  a  comparison  of  the  three  gospels  a  common  narrative 
may  be  extracted.  This  is  called  "the  triple  tradition."  It  is 
very  bald  and  meagre  ;  but  it  is  taken  as  the  reliable  history.  All 
else  in  the  three  gospels  is  aftergrowth. 

Salmon.2 — ^jj  Xhere  was  one  common  narrative.  (2)  This  must  have 
been  in  writing,  not  a  merely  oral  tradition.  (3)  It  was  in  Greek. 
(4)  It  came  so  near  to  Mark  that  we  may  regard  it  as  our  Mark, 
though  slight  editorial  alterations  must  be  allowed  for.  Then  there 
was  Matthew's  Logia.  Matthew  and  Luke  are  based  on  these  two 
works,  but  with  other  sources  also.  The  difference  in  the  narratives 
of  the  infancy,  etc.,  shows  that  they  were  independent  of  one 
another. 

Sanday.'* — Accepts  Mark  and  the  Logia  as  the  chief  authorities ;  but  he 
points  out  the  probabiUty  of  other  sources  being  used  by  the  writers 
of  the  first  and  the  third  gospels,  who  sometimes  prefer  these  to 
Mark  and  the  Logia  in  parallel  passages.  This  accounts  for  their 
very  different  versions  of  some  incidents  and  sayings  of  Christ. 

Recent  investigations  have  revived  the  question  as  to  whether  an  Aramaic 
document  was  used  by  all  three  evangelists.  In  this  way  the  appearance 
of  synonymous  words  in  the  three  gospels  *  may  be  accounted  for,  and  so 
too  perhaps  some  discrepancies.  Resch  maintains  that  there  must  have  been 
an  Aramaic  document  behind  Mark ;  and  Professor  Marshall  has  advocated 
a  common  Aramaic  original ;  so  has  Dr.  Abbott, 

4.  Probable  Conclusions. 

This  narrowing  of  the  issues  as  the  result  of  recent  criticism 
in  various  schools  is  not  a  little  significant.  Certain  results 
may  be  regarded  as  fairly  established.  Others  are  coming  out 
with  increasing  clearness.  The  following  points  seem  to  be 
settled  with  tolerable  unanimity : — 

(a)  The  Priority  of  Mark  to  the  other  Two  Synoptics  and  its 

1  Einleitung,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  158  ff.      »  Encycl.  Brit.,  art.  "Gospels." 
'  Introd.^  Lectures viii.  and  ix.        *  D.B.^,  art.  "Gospels." 
*  e.g.^  Kpd^^aTov  in  Mark  ii.  ii ;  K\ivT]v  in  Matthew  ix.  6;  K\iuldioy 
in  I^uke  v.  24,  for  the  paralytic's  mattress. 


PROBABLE  CONCLUSIONS  325 

Employment  in  the  Construction  of  both  Matthew  and  Luke. — 
An  important  factor  of  the  case  is  the  ahuost  complete  absorp- 
tion of  Mark  in  the  other  two  gospels.  This  can  be  accounted 
for  thus.  Matthew  comes  first  and  takes  a  large  slice  of  Mark. 
Luke  follows  quite  independently,  and  takes  his  large  slice. 
The  natural  result  is  that  they  partly  agree  and  partly  differ 
in  their  selection,  so  that  while  they  have  a  considerable 
amount  of  common  material  from  Mark,  they  each  have 
extracts  exclusively  their  own ;  but  between  them  they  appro- 
priate nearly  the  whole  of  Mark.  But  why  not  put  it  the 
other  way,  and  take  Mark  as  a  compilation  from  the  other 
two  synoptics?  For  one  thing  because  Mark  is  a  fresh, 
vigorous,  rugged  composition,  while  the  other  synoptics  are 
smoother  in  style.  It  bears  on  the  face  of  it  a  character  of 
individuality  and  original  force.  Moreover,  the  difficulty  of 
producing  the  result  as  suggested  by  this  alternative  would  be 
insuperable  in  the  cases  where  the  three  gospels  verbally 
agree,  because  it  is  found  that,  though  they  are  often  only 
loosely  parallel,  whenever  Matthew  and  Luke  verbally  agree 
on  a  sentence  that  is  also  in  Mark,  that  gospel  also  verbally 
agreeing.  This  would  be  inevitable  if  both  took  from  Mark. 
But  in  the  opposite  case,  i.e.y  supposing  Mark  to  be  based  on 
the  two  others,  the  difficulty  of  picking  out  the  verbal  agree- 
ments of  Matthew  and  Luke,  and  reproducing  them  in 
Mark  would  be  insuperable  ;  and  if  successfully  accomplished, 
it  would  spoil  Mark's  freshness  and  power  of  narration.  Be- 
sides, it  is  unreasonable  to  suppose  it  would  ever  be  attempted. 
We  start  with  Mark,  the  genuineness  of  which  is  now 
generally  conceded.  Certain  points  at  which  Mark  differs 
from  the  others  suggest  that  it  has  been  re-edited  since  it 
was  used  for  Matthew  and  Luke,  but  that  is  all.  Substantially 
we  can  take  it  as  the  original  gospel ;  there  is  no  need  to  call 
in  the  hypothesis  of  a  primitive  Mark.  Its  own  fresh  character 
is  against  that  hypothesis,  and  its  close  resemblance  to  so  much 
of  what  is  common  in  Matthew  and  Luke  renders  it  needless. ^ 

^  Dr.  Abbott  has  shown  that  Matthew  and  Luke  used  a  revised  edition 
of  Mark,  the  Canonical  Mark  being  more  primitive. 


326  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

b.  An  Original  Collection  of  Sayings  of  Christ. — Many 
sayings  of  Christ  are  found  in  Matthew  and  Luke  which  are 
not  in  Mark.  This  applies  both  to  parables  and  to  strings  of 
utterances,  making  up  the  twelve  sections  referred  to  above.^ 
It  is  generally  agreed  that  this  source  is  Matthew's  Logia^  des- 
cribed by  Papias.  But  it  must  have  been  translated  into  Greek 
to  allow  of  verbal  identities  in  the  Greek  renderings  of  sayings  of 
Christ.2  And  yet  it  must  also  have  been  known  in  the  original 
Hebrew  or  Aramaic  to  account  for  variations  in  the  translation. 

Of  course  some  other  collection  of  the  sayings  of  Christ  might  have 
served  ;  but  the  presumption  is  in  favour  of  Matthew's  Logia.  We  know 
from  Papias  that  such  a  book  existed  ;  the  apostolic  authorship  would  give 
it  authority ;  and  the  unanimous  ascription  of  the  first  gospel — which  con- 
tains most  of  our  teachings  of  Christ — to  that  apostle  associates  his  name 
with  it  from  very  early  times,  and  is  a  presumption  that  he  was  in  some 
way  connected  with  it. 

c.  Certain  Other  Sources  Unknown  to  Us. — These  are 
required  for  both  the  infancy  narratives  and  the  resurrection 
narratives.  Neither  of  those  narratives  are  in  Mark;  nor 
could  either  have  been  in  the  Logia^  because  if  either  had 
been,  then  the  authors  of  both  the  first  and  the  third  gospels 
using  that  document  would  have  seen  it,  and  would  have 
avoided  great  divergences  between  their  accounts.^ 

Moreover,  St.  Luke's  authority  for  the  large  section  of  the 
Peraean  teaching  that  is  peculiar  to  nis  gospel  could  scarcely 
have  been  the  Logia^  or  the  first  gospel,  which  gave  so  much 
space  to  the  teachings  of  Jesus,  would  not  have  omitted  it. 
In  his  preface  St.  Luke  leads  us  to  suppose  that  he  had  a 
number  of  sources. 

Two  other  likely  conclusions  may  be  briefly  noticed: 
(i)  Probably  Mark  knew  the  Logia.  This  will  account  for  his 
close  agreement  with  Matthew  and  Luke  in  so  many  of  his 
reports  of  the  sayings  of  Christ.  (2)  Probably  Matthew  and 
Luke  were  quite  independent  of  one  another.  The  diflerences 
where  they  part  from  Mark  and  the  Logia,  as  in  the  infancy 
and  resurrection  narratives,  point  to  this  conclusion. 

But  while  these  results  may  be  considered  as  fairly  settled, 

1  Page  317. 

^  See  the  rare  word  eVtoiJatoj  in  both  Matthew's  and  Luke's  versions  of 
the  Lord's  prayer.  »  Mentioned  on  page  288. 


PROBABLE   CONCLUSIONS  327 

some  very  perplexing  questions  remain  open  to  speculation. 
The  question  of  an  Aramaic  original,  behind  all  the  gospels 
and  other  than  the  Logia^  is  still  obscure.  It  looks  as  though 
this  might  account  for  curious  merely  verbal  differences. 
And  then  there  is  the  question  how  far  the  evangelists  who 
used  the  Logia  kept  closely  to  the  text  of  it,  or  how  far 
that  may  have  been  modified  before  it  reached  their  hands. 
It  is  scarcely  to  be  supposed  that  a  document  written  by 
one  of  the  Twelve  Apostles  would  be  so  freely  handled 
as  the  divergences  suggest.  Thus,  for  example,  the  two 
accounts  of  the  Beatitudes  are  so  very  different,  that  we 
cannot  believe  both  evangelists  took  them  from  the  same 
original.  If  they  did,  which  is  closest  to  that  original  ?  If 
Matthew's  version  is  most  correct,  we  must  suppose  that 
Luke  deliberately  emptied  it  of  its  spiritual  wealth  of  ex- 
pression, and  reduced  it  to  a  more  secular  form,  which 
would  be  quite  contrary  to  his  character  as  a  historian, 
and  utterly  unlike  what  his  preface  leads  us  to  expect. 
But  if  Luke's  is  the  original  version,  and  the  writer  of  the 
first  gospel  expanded  it  to  the  proportions  now  found  in 
that  work,  we  appear  to  have  the  evangelist  improving  on 
the  Master — an  impossibility.  We  seem  thus  led  to  the 
conclusion  that  there  was  more  than  one  collection  of  Logia 
of  Christ  in  the  early  Church.  This  is  only  what  we  might 
naturally  expect  Perhaps  the  mistake  has  been  in  attributing 
too  much  in  Luke  to  Matthew's  Logia.  Luke's  parallel 
sayings  in  divergent  form  could  be  more  reasonably  attributed 
to  some  other  collection.  We  must  still  admit  Mark  and 
the  Logia  as  the  main  sources.  But  probably  more  weight 
and  scope  should  be  allowed  to  the  special  sources  of  Luke. 
Finally,  the  contact  of  the  evangelists  with  traditions  and  living 
witnesses  would  lead  them  to  modify  what  reached  them  in 
written  sources. 

In  spite  of  the  difficulties  that  still  beset  the  problem, 
we  may  be  thankful  that  the  progress  made  towards  a 
solution  has  gone  far  to  establish  the  historicity  of  the 
synoptic  records. 


CHAPTER  III. 
THE   FOURTH   GOSPEL 

1.  Authorship  and  Historicity.      I  3.  Contents. 

2.  Time  and  Place  of  Writing.      |  4.  Characteristics. 

I.  Authorship  and  Historicity. 

We  cannot  speak  of  the  authenticity  or  genuineness  of  the 
gospels  in  the  sense  in  which  we  apply  those  words  to  the 
epistles,  because  all  four  of  these  works  are  anonymous. 
The  titles  which  they  bear  in  our  Bibles  were  not  originally 
attached  to  them,  and  in  the  text  itself  there  is  no  direct 
claim  to  authorship.  Matthew  and  Mark  are  perfectly  im- 
personal. Luke,  in  its  preface,  contains  some  personal 
statements  by  the  writer,  but  without  a  hint  as  to  his 
name.  In  John  we  have  several  statements  that  point 
pretty  clearly  to  the  identification  of  the  writer.  Still  he 
is  not  named,  and  it  is  possible  to  hold  as  some  have  done, 
either  (i)  that  "the  beloved  disciple"  was  not  St.  John,  or 
(2)  that  "the  beloved  disciple,"  though  allowed  to  be  St. 
John,  is  not  claimed  by  the  book  itself  as  its  author.  These 
are  questions  to  be  examined  on  their  merits  apart  from  ideas 
of  pseudonymity  or  forgery.  Nevertheless  the  historicity  of 
the  gospel  is  closely  bound  up  with  the  authorship.  To 
establish  the  tradition  that  the  Apostle  John  wrote  it  is  to 
vindicate  its  essential  historicity. 

a.  The  Witness  of  Antiquity. — The  gospel  was  certainly 
known  and  used  in  the  Church  soon  after  the  beginning  of 

328 


AUTHORSHIP  AND   HISTORICITY     329 

the  second  century,  and  we  have  statements  attributing  it  to 
the  Apostle  John  as  early  as  the  middle  of  that  century. 

Moreover  the  Eucharistic  prayers  in  the  Didachl  are  very 
Johannine,  though  we  cannot  be  certain  that  they  are  based 
on  the  gospel  {Didachh  9).  The  gospel  was  in  the  ancient 
Syriac  and  in  the  old  Latin  of  North  Africa  by  the  end  of  the 
second  century. 

(i)  For  the  antiquity  of  the  gospel  we  have  some  important  new 
evidence  furnished  in  our  own  age.  The  recovery  of  the  Refutation  of 
all  Heresies  by  Hippolytus  enables  us  to  see  in  that  book  two  quotations 
from  the  gospel  in  gnostic  writings  cited  by  Hippolytus.  Referring  to 
Valentinus  {c.  a.d.  135)  he  writes:  "Therefore,  says  he,  the  Saviour 
says :  All  who  have  come  before  me  are  thieves  and  robbers,"  plainly 
taken  from  John  x.  8  {Ref  Haer.y  vi.  30);  and  referring  to  BasiUdes 
(f.A.D.  133-4):  "And  this  he  says  is  what  is  said  in  the  gospels:  The 
true  light  which  enlighteneth  every  man  was  coming  into  the  world," 
which  is  John  i.  9  {Ref.  Haer.,  vii.  22) ;  and  again  also  referring  to 
Basilides :  "And  that  each  thing,  he  says,  has  its  own  seasons,  the 
Saviour  is  a  sufficient  witness,  when  He  says,  My  hour  is  not  yet  come,"  a 
saying  found  only  in  John  ii.  4  {Ref.  Haer.,  vii.  27).^ 

From  the  internal  evidence  of  his  writings  it  becomes  increasingly 
probable  that  Justin  Martyr  knew  our  gospel  —  though  probably  he  did 
not  include  it  among  his  "Memoirs  of  the  Apostles."  Thus  in  his 
account  of  baptism  he  writes,  ' '  For  Christ  also  said,  Except  ye  be  born 
again  ye  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven " — a  slight 
variation  of  John  iii.  3  (i  Apol.  61).^  Then  the  recent  discovery  of 
Ta.tia.n's  Dtatessaron  makes  it  certain  that  its  author  had  the  fourth  gospel. 
He  begins  with  the  prologue  and  weaves  the  contents  of  the  gospel  into 
his  composite  narrative.  Possibly  Papias  knew  our  gospel,  for  Iren?eus 
gives  an  explanation  of  the  phrase,  "  In  my  father's  house  are  many 
mansions"  (John  xiv.  2),  by  "the  presbyters,"  among  whom  he  seems  to 
include  Papias  (Adv.  Haer.,  v.  36).  Certainly  he  knew  the  companion 
writing,  I  John,  for  Eusebius  tells  us  that  he  "used  testimonies  from  the 
first  Epistle  of  John"  {H.E.,  iii.  39).  Further,  the  recent  vindication  of 
the  Ignatian  epistles'  enables  us  to  use  their  evidence,  and  also  that  of 
Polycarp's  epistle,  which  stands  or  falls  with  them.  Now  these  works 
are  saturated  with  Johannine  ideas  and  phrases.** 

*  It  is  idle  to  assert  that  Hippolytus  may  have  been  citing  writings 
of  the  later  followers  of  these  gnostics.  The  repeated  "he  says"  {^tici) 
in  the  singular  forbids  that  interpretation. 

*  Justin  Martyr's  evidence  is  thoroughly  discussed  and  vindicated  by 
Ezra  Abbot,  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

^  By  Lightfoot  and  Zahn  ;  their  genuineness  is  accepted  by  Harnack. 

*  e.g.,  "  Recover  yourselves  in  faith,  which  is  the  flesh  of  the  Lord,  and 
in  love  which  is  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ"  {Troll.  8);  "Living  water" 
{Rom.  7);  "Children  of  light"  {Phil.  2);  Christ  as  the  "Word" 
{Mag.  8) ;  "The  door  of  the  Father  "  {Phil.  9).  Polycarp  quotes  I  John 
iv.  3  {Ad.  Phil.  vii.  i). 


330  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

(2)  For  the  association  of  St.  John's  name  with  the  gospel, 
the  earliest  witness  is  Theophilus  of  Antioch  (a.d.  170),  who 
writes,  "  John  says :  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the 
Word  was  with  God  " — and  more  from  the  same  passage  in  the 
gospel  {Ad.  Autolyc.  22).  Later  fathers,  Tertullian,  Clement  A., 
Origen,  etc.,  all  ascribe  the  gospel  to  John.  Polycrates  of 
Ephesus  (a.d.  190),  referring  to  John,  says :  "  He  who  rested 
on  the  bosom  of  the  Lord"  (Eusebius,  H.E.^  iii.  31^).  In 
the  Muratorian  Fragment  the  gospel  was  attributed  to  John. 
But  the  most  important  witness  is  Irenaeus,  for  that  father  tells 
us  that  he  has  distinct  memories  of  Polycarp,  who  was  a 
disciple  of  John.  Writing  to  Florinus,  he  says :  "  For  I  saw 
thee,  when  I  was  still  a  boy  in  Lower  Asia,  in  company  with 
Polycarp,  while  thou  wast  faring  prosperously  in  the  royal 
court,  and  endeavouring  to  stand  well  with  him.  For  I 
distinctly  remember  the  incidents  of  that  time  better  than 
events  of  recent  occurrence ;  for  the  lessons  received  in  child- 
hood, growing  with  the  growth  of  the  soul,  become  identified 
with  it,  so  that  I  can  describe  the  very  place  in  which  the 
blessed  Polycarp  used  to  sit  when  he  discoursed,  and  his 
goings  out  and  his  comings  in,  and  his  manner  of  life,  and  his 
personal  appearance,  and  the  discourses  which  he  held  before 
the  people,  and  how  he  would  describe  his  intercourse  with 
John  and  with  the  rest  who  had  seen  the  Lord,  and  how  he 
would  relate  their  words.  And  whatsoever  things  he  had 
heard  from  them  about  the  Lord,  and  about  his  miracles,  and 
about  his  teaching,  Polycarp,  as  having  received  them  from 
eye-witnesses  of  the  life  of  the  Word,  would  relate  altogether 
in  accordance  with  the  Scriptures.  To  these  discourses  I 
used  to  listen  at  the  time  with  attention  by  God's  mercy  which 
was  bestowed  upon  me,  noting  them  down,  not  on  paper,  but  in 
my  heart ;  and  by  the  grace  of  God  I  constantly  ruminate  upon 
them  faithfully"  (Eusebius,  ff.E.f  v.  20).  Now  Irenaeus  is 
unhesitating  in  holding  that  the  apostle  John  wrote  the  fourth 
gospel.     It  is  difficult  to  think  that  he  was  mistaken. 

^  llilgenfeld  admits  that  this  is  an  allusion  to  John  xiii.  25. 


AUTHORSHIP   AND   HISTORICITY     331 

b.  Internal  Evidence. — The  supreme  spiritual  worth  of  the 
gospel  speaks  for  its  apostolic  origin.  At  all  events  it  justifies 
its  veracity,  for  the  book  exalts  the  idea  of  truth,  and  sternly 
denounces  falsehood.  The  verse  xxi.  24  is  perhaps  to  be 
regarded  as  external  evidence,  the  testimony  it  may  be  of  the 
Ephesian  elders.  At  all  events,  it  is  very  ancient — it  is  found 
in  all  good  copies;  and  it  formally  authenticates  the  book. 
There  is  also  a  definite  claim  to  veracity  in  xix.  35.  But  who 
is  the  writer  making  this  claim  ?  It  seems  clear  that  he  is  the 
same  as  the  beloved  disciple ;  the  anonymous  reference  to 
that  disciple  can  only  be  satisfactorily  explained  on  the 
hypothesis  that  he  is  the  author.  Certainly  the  claim  is  for 
one  of  the  inner  circle  of  Christ's  disciples.  Peter  is  named 
repeatedly  as  a  different  person.  James,  the  brother  of  John, 
is  not  named;  but  he  died  too  early.  The  almost  certain 
inference  is  that  the  allusion  is  intended  to  point  to 
John.i 

We  may  take  it  then,  that,  though  not  in  so  many  words, 
yet  really  and  distinctly,  the  gospel  claims  to  come  from  the 
apostle  John,  and  the  ancient  attestation  appended  to  it  is 
intended  to  support  and  confirm  his  authority. 

Further,  when  we  come  to  details,  we  see  a  convergence  of 
signs  that  point  in  the  same  direction.  It  is  common  to 
indicate  this  in  four  narrowing  circles : — (i)  The  author 
was  a  Jew.  He  quotes  the  O.T.  as  frequently  as  Matthew, 
generally  from  the  LXX.,  but  on  two  or  three  occasions 
translating  directly  from  the  Hebrew  where  the  LXX.  had 
diverged.  ^  His  construction  is  Hebraistic,  with  simple 
sentences  linked  together  by  the  word  "and."  He  fre- 
quently gives  us  the  Hebrew  a/x^v,  and  he  employs  such 
Hebraisms  as  "son  of  perdition,"  "rejoice  with  joy,"  etc. 
Then  he  shows  familiarity  with  the  feasts  and  with  Jewish 
manners  generally. 

1  The  suggestions  of  Andrew  and  Nicodemus  for  "the  beloved  disciple" 
are  quite  unsupported  by  evidence. 

'  e.g.^  John  xiii.  i8,  follows  the  Heb.  "has  lifted  up  his  heel,"  though 
the  LXX.  reads  "multiplied  tripping  with  the  heel." 


332  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Thus  he  is  acquainted  with  details  of  the  Tabernacles  («.^.,  vii.  37) ; 
the  water  pots  for  cleansing  (ii.  6) ;  the  question  of  purifying  (iii.  25) ;  the 
Jews'  purification  of  themselves  before  the  Passover  (xi.  55) ;  their  fear  of 
defilement  on  entering  the  Proetorium  (xviii.  28).  The  same  familiarity 
with  Jewish  customs  is  seen  in  the  relation  of  the  Jews  to  the  Samaritans 
(iv.  9),  the  idea  of  the  soul's  pre-existence  and  sin  (ix.  2),  the  objection  to 
let  the  bodies  remain  on  the  crosses  on  the  Sabbath  (xix.  31). 

The  mention  of  the  Jews  as  foreigners  (ii.  6,  13;  v.  i ;  vi.  4)  is  no 
objection  if  John  is  writing  for  Gentiles. 

(2)  The  author  was  a  Palestinian.  He  shows  his  know- 
ledge of  quite  out-of-the-way  places  such  as  Cana  of  Galilee, 
Bethany  beyond  Jordan,  Sychar,  ^  the  exact  situation  of 
Jacob's  well,  with  the  Samaritan  holy  mountain,  Gerizim, 
close  at  hand,  and  the  cornfield  in  full  view.  He  knows 
many  details  about  Jerusalem — indeed  his  knowledge  of  that 
city  and  its  neighbourhood  is  quite  exceptional. 

Thus  he  knows  the  intermittent  springs  (v.  2),  the  pool  of  Siloam 
(ix.  7),  Solomon's  porch  (x.  23),  the  number  of  stadia  between  Jerusalem 
and  Bethany  (xi.  18),  the  Valley  of  the  Kidron  and  the  Garden  of 
Gethsemane  (xviii.   i),  Gabbatha  (xix.  13),  Golgotha  (xix.  17).  ■^ 

(3)  The  author  was  contemporary  with  the  events  described. 
His  treatment  of  the  Messianic  ideas  of  the  time  suggests 
this.  He  shows  how  the  expectation  of  the  Messiah  was 
shared  by  the  Samaritans,  and  he  distinguishes  "  the  prophet " 
(i.  21,  25  ;  vi.  14;  vii.  40)  from  the  Christ,  although  Christian 
teachers  soon  became  accustomed  to  recognise  both  in  our 
Lord.  And  then  on  the  negative  side  the  evidence  is  also 
for  his  being  of  this  early  period.  He  makes  no  reference 
to  the  great  gnostic  heresies  of  the  second  century.  Many 
of  his  phrases  were  used  by  the  teachers  of  those  systems, 
and  he  would  have  guarded  against  such  use  of  them  had  he 
known  of  the  possibility  of  it. 

(4)  The  author  writes  as  an  eye-witness.  Four  times  the 
claim  is  made  by  him,  or  for  him,  viz.,  in  i.  14;  xix.  35; 
xxi.  24 ;  and  i  John  i.  i,  for  the  epistle  was  certainly  written 

1  Identified  with  Asgar  by  the  "  Palestine  Exploration  Fund." 
"  Professor  Sanday  has  shown  the  absurdity  of  the  theory  that  St.  John 
might  have  "got  up"  his  knowledge  of  the  locality  from   "geography 
books,"  by  exhibiting  the  meagreness  of  such  books  even  for  important 
parts  of  the  empire  {Expositor,  March,  1892). 


AUTHORSHIP  AND   HISTORICITY     333 

by  the  author  of  the  gospel.     The  vivid  details  of  the  gospel 
suggest  the  eye-witness. 

In  particular  consider  the  narrative  of  the  loaves  and  fishes,  with 
St.  Philip's  place  in  it,  etc.  (vi.  5,  9,  15,  23),  and  the  many  notes  of  time 
{e.g.,  i.  29,  35,  43  ;  ii.  I  ;  iv.  43,  52 ;  vi.  22 ;  xi.  6,  7 ;  xii.  i,  12 ;  xiii.  i  ; 
XX.  i),  even  hours  of  the  day  (iv.  6 ;  xiii.  30 ;  xviii.  28).  Moreover  the 
author  knows  and  understands  the  feelings  of  the  disciples. 

When  we  put  all  this  together  we  cannot  fail  to  see  that  the 
gospel  is  amply  attested  as  a  genuine  work  justly  ascribed  to 
the  apostle  John.  It  would  seem  that  such  evidence  could 
scarcely  be  disturbed  by  the  most  serious  objections. 

c.  Objectio7is. — The  gospel  was  received  in  the  early 
Church  with  practical  unanimity.  The  only  exceptions  are 
with  some  people  whom  Irenseus  mentions  without  naming 
them,^  and  an  obscure  party  in  the  second  century  whom 
Epiphanius,  writing  in  the  fourth  century,  describes  under 
the  nickname  of  the  "  Alogi,"  probably  the  same  people 
Irenaeus  referred  to.  He  tells  us  that  they  rejected  both 
the  gospel  and  the  Apocalypse,  attributing  them  to  Cerinthus, 
the  heretic.  But  their  reasons  were  evidently  doctrinal,  such 
as  objections  to  the  "  logos  "  doctrine.^ 

But  during  the  present  century  a  number  of  objections  have 
been  raised,  and  various  hypotheses  proposed.  The  principal 
difficulties  may  be  briefly  epitomised  as  follows  : — 

(i)  Inconsistency  with  the  character  of  St.  John.  In  the 
synoptics  he  and  his  brother  are  "Boanerges"  (Mark  iii.  17), 
and  they  evince  a  passionate  and  somewhat  narrow-minded 
disposition ;  ^  but  in  the  fourth  gospel  "  the  beloved  disciple  " 
has  quite  another  disposition.  This  is  a  very  feeble  objection. 
It  allows  no  room  for  the  softening  and  mellowing  of  character. 
Besides,  it  assumes  that  if  Jesus  especially  loved  any  disciple, 
that  disciple  must  have  been  of  a  gentle  disposition. 

(2)  Inconsistency  with  the  Apocalypse.  This  is  more 
serious.      As    early    as    the    third    century    Dionysius    of 

*  Adv.  Haer.y  iii.  11. 

2  Epiphanius,  Haer.y  1. 1.  To  these  may  be  added  an  obscure  "Gaius." 

*  See,  for  instance,  Mark  ix.  38  fif. ;  Luke  ix.  54,  55. 


334  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Alexandria  pointed  out  the  great  difference  between  the 
style  of  the  two  works,  and  deduced  the  conclusion  that 
the  Apocalypse  must  have  been  written  by  some  other 
John.i  The  grammatical  forms  of  the  gospel  are  in  good 
Greek;  but  those  of  the  Apocalj'pse  are  most  erratic,  so 
much  so,  that  "the  grammar  of  the  Apocalypse"  has  a 
chapter  assigned  to  it  in  books  of  N.T.  grammar.  And 
while  the  gospel  is  liberal  in  tone,  the  Apocalypse  has 
statements  more  in  accordance  with  Judaistic  Christianity. 
So  strong  are  these  divergences,  that  it  is  generally  admitted 
that  St.  John  could  not  have  written  the  Apocalypse  after  writ- 
ing the  gospel.  It  is  possible  to  think  of  the  Apocalypse 
as  composed  before  his  residence  in  Ephesus  and  the  gospel 
many  years  later,  when  his  associations  with  Greek  civilisation 
as  well  as  the  growth  of  his  own  Christian  experience  may 
have  much  changed  his  thought  and  language.^  But  if  the 
same  man  did  not  write  both  books,  it  is  a  question  whether 
we  should  not  follow  Dionysius  and  assign  the  Apoca- 
lypse to  some  other  writer.^ 

(3)  Inconsistency  with  the  synoptics.  This  is  pointed 
out  in  a  number  of  instances.  Thus  the  synoptic  accounts 
represent  the  scene  of  Christ's  ministry  as  wholly  in  Galilee, 
till  at  the  very  last  He  goes  up  to  Jerusalem  to  die;  but 
John  contains  descriptions  of  several  visits  to  Jerusalem 
and  public  teaching  in  that  city.  No  doubt  it  is  the  fact 
that  the  three  earlier  gospels  give  us  the  ministry  in  the 
north,  perhaps  resting  on  a  Galilean  tradition  ;  yet  incidentally 
they  admit  that  Jesus  had  been  to  Jerusalem  by  recording 
His  lament  over  Jerusalem,  where  He  says,  "  How  often 
would  I  have  gathered  your  children,  etc. ;  but  ye  would 
not."  (Matthew  xxiii.  37;  Luke  xiii.  34,  35.)*  Then  it 
is  said  that  the  synoptics  allow  but  little   more  than   one 

1  See  EusEBius,  H.E.,  vii.  25.  ^ 

2  That  depends  on  the  date  of  the  Apocalypse,  which  will  be  considered 
further  on. 

3  For  a  full  discussion  of  this  point  see  Reynolds,  Ptil.  Com.,  John. 

*  The  best  MSS.  of  Luke  iv.  44  read:  "He  was  preaching  in  the 
synagogues  of  Judaea." 


AUTHORSHIP   AND   HISTORICITY     335 

year  for  our  Lord's  ministry;  but  John  gives  three  years. 
Now  the  article  on  "  Chronology "  in  the  new  Dictionary 
of  the  Bible  shows  that  though  Luke  seems  to  think  of 
but  one  year,  Mark  requires  two,  and  John  gives  no  more 
than  two.  So  this  difficulty  vanishes.  Next  it  is  pointed 
out  that  while  the  synoptics  show  Jesus  taking  the  last 
Passover  at  the  usual  Jewish  date  of  that  feast,  John  seems 
to  treat  the  Passover  as  not  due  till  the  evening  of  the  day 
on  which  Jesus  was  crucified.^ 

Further,  we  miss  all  signs  of  progressive  development  in  the 
teaching ;  e.g.  in  the  synoptics  Jesus  veils  His  messiahship  at 
first;  it  is  only  confessed  by  St.  Peter  at  Caesarea  after  the 
public  work  in  Galilee  is  over,  and  even  then  Christ  will 
not  have  it  proclaimed.  (Mark  viii.  27-30.)  But  in  John 
it  is  admitted  from  the  first,  even  virtually  proclaimed  by 
the  Baptist.2  But  the  gravest  difficulty  remains  to  be  con- 
sidered. Our  Lord's  method  of  teaching  is  completely 
changed  in  the  fourth  gospel.  Instead  of  picturesque  parables 
and  pithy  proverbs,  we  have  long  discourses  and  arguments. 
Then,  while  in  the  synoptics  Christ  is  practical  and  occupied 
with  others,  in  John  He  is  theological,  transcendental,  and 
occupied  with  His  own  person  and  relation  to  God.  It  is 
something,  however,  to  have  it  proved  that  the  essential  truths 
taught  by  Christ  are  the  same  in  all  four  gospels.^ 

d.  Probable  Solution. — The  weighty  evidence  for  the 
antiquity  and  Johannine  authorship  still  stands,  and  that 
too  cannot  be  lightly  set  aside,  although  sometimes  it  is 
ignored  when   the  difficulties   are  under  discussion.     While 

^  For  the  synoptic  date  see  Mark  xiv.  12 ;  Matthew  xxvi  17 ;  and 
especially  Luke  xxii.  7  ;  and  for  John's  date,  John  xiii.  I,  29;  xviii.  28; 
xix.  14,  31,  42.  Three  methods  of  reconciliation  have  been  proposed  : 
(i)  That  Christ  anticipated  the  feast.  The  synoptic  references  exclude 
this.  (2)  That  John  refers  to  the  whole  week  of  the  festival,  most  of 
which  was  still  future,  under  the  names  "Passover"  and  **  Feast,"  the 
"  Preparation  "  being  taken  as  the  Jewish  name  for  Friday.  (3)  That  the 
eating  of  the  lambs  was  not  got  through  on  the  Passover  night,  so  many 
had  to  be  prepared. 

2  John  i.  29,  41,  49 ;  iv.  26,  etc. 

8  Demonstrated  both  by  Wendt  and  Beyschlag. 


336  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

accepting  the  tradition  on  this  evidence,  and  assigning  the 
gospel  to  St.  John,  we  may  still  allow  considerable  scope 
to  two  considerations :  (i)  It  must  be  conceded  that  St. 
John  reproduced  his  memories  after  long  meditation  and 
frequent  use  of  them  in  teaching  as  they  shaped  themselves 
in  the  forms  of  his  own  thought.  This  is  apparent  from 
the  fact  that  the  language  and  style  are  exactly  the  same 
in  sayings  of  Christ,  in  sayings  of  John  the  Baptist,  in 
comments  of  the  evangelist,  and  in  the  first  epistle  of  John.^ 
We  must  attribute  this  unique  and  easily  recognisable 
Johannine  style  to  St.  John  himself  throughout.  That  need 
not  trouble  us  if  we  remember  that  "the  letter  killeth," 
while  it  is  "the  Spirit"  that  "giveth  life."  (2)  Possibly 
we  should  go  further,  and  allow  that  St.  John  may  have  written 
the  work  through  one  of  his  disciples,  who  would  be  re- 
sponsible for  the  signs  of  Greek  culture  it  contains,  while 
the  substance  of  the  incidents  and  teaching  was  contributed 
by  the  apostle  himself. 

Not  only  extreme  radical  critics,  but  more  moderate  students  have  found 
difficulties  in  accepting  this  gospel.  Still  the  movement  of  late  is  towards 
both  a  fuller  recognition  of  historicity  and  a  closer  association  with  the 
name  of  John  the  apostle. 

Pfleiderer,  it  is  true,  holds  that  the  book  does  not  belong  to  historical 
works  at  all,  but  must  be  classed  with  Hellenistic  doctrinal  productions, 
as  "the  richest  fruit  of  the  development  of  the  Hellenistic  doctrine  found 
in  the  Hebrew."^ 

On  the  other  hand,  Weizsacker  allows  the  gospel  to  contain  genuine 
historical  reports  of  the  sayings  and  deeds  of  Christ ;  and  although  he  does 
not  admit  that  it  comes  directly  from  John,  he  attributes  it  to  a  Johannine 
School  at  Ephesus.^ 

Holtzmann  denies  the  apostolic  authorship,^  ascribing  it  to  a  Christian 
Jew  of  the  dispersion  ;  and  so  does  Julicher,  who  regards  the  gospel  as  "a 
philosophic  fiction  "  with  a  religious  tendency,  of  the  third  generation.** 

Harnack  takes  a  middle  course.  He  regards  John  the  elder  as  the 
author,   but  allows  that  this  man  obtained  his    information  from  the 

^  e.g.^  for  similarities  between  John  the  Baptist  and  the  evangelist  see 
i.  15-18  and  iii.  27-36;  and  for  similarities  between  Christ  and  the 
evangelist  see  iii.  11-21.  In  the  one  case  John's  words,  in  the  other 
Christ's  words,  blend  imperceptibly  with  the  evangelist's. 

*  UrchrisUnthum,  pp.  695-786. 

*  Apostolic  Age,  English  trans.,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  206-226. 

*  Einleiiung,  pp.  453-465.  '  Emleitung,  p.  258. 


CONTENTS  337 

apostles.^    This  is  to  grant  the  substantial  historicity  of  the  gospel.     Mc- 
Giffert  also  ascribes  it  to  John  the  elder. ^ 

The  great  difficulty  for  these  critics  is  the  weighty  testimony  of  Irenaeus. 
Hamack  holds  that  since  that  Father  fell  into  an  error  in  supposing  that 
Papias  knew  John,  he  may  have  done  the  same  with  regard  to  Polycarp, 
the  essential  link  of  connection  with  the  evangelist.  But  the  cases  are  not 
at  all  parallel.  Irenaeus  never  writes  of  Papias  as  he  does  of  Polycarp  in 
his  letter  to  Florinus.  The  Johannine  authorship  of  the  gospel  has  obtained 
substantial  support  from  Lightfoot,  Sanday,  Reynolds,  etc.,  and  it  is 
elaborately  defended  by  Zahn.^ 

2.  Time  and  Place  of  Writing. 

Even  extreme  criticism  has  continually  receded  in  its  asser- 
tions concerning  the  date  of  the  gospel. 

The  Tubingen  date  (A.d.  160-170)  of  Baur  and  Schwegler  is  now  no 
longer  maintained  by  any.  Zeller  retreated  to  150,  Pfleiderer  to  140, 
Hilgenfeld  to  130-140.  Jiilicher  dates  it  soon  after  100,  Harnack  80-110. 
An  exact  date  cannot  be  fixed. 

While  assigning  the  gospel  to  the  apostle  John,  we  must 
look  for  it  in  his  extreme  old  age,  that  is  to  say  not  far  from 
the  end  of  the  first  century.  There  is  a  general  agreement  in  re- 
garding Ephesus  as  the  place  of  its  origin. 

3.  Contents. 

a.  Introduction^  i.  1-18. 

The  Word  with  God;  manifested  (i)  in  creation,  (2)  in 
prophecy,  (3)  in  the  light  within,  (4)  in  the  Incarnation. 

b.  Before  the  First  Passover ;  the  Baptist  and  Christ's  early 
Galilean  Mi7iistry^  i.  19-ii.  12. 

L  19-34,  John's  testimony  to  Christ. 

35-51,  John's  disciples  passing  over  to  Jesus. 

ii.  1-12,  The  marriage  at  Cana;  Jesus  at  Capernaum. 

c.  The  Year  from  the  First  to  the  Second  Passovers;  Christ'' s 
Work  in  Jerusalem^  fudcea^  Samaria^  and  Galilee^  ii.  13 -v.  47. 

ii.  13-25,  Jesus  at  the  Passover;  purging  the  temple. 
iii.  1-2 1,  Nicodemus  and  the  new  birth. 
22-36,  Jesus  in  Judaea;  John  at  ^non;  his  testimony  to 
the  superiority  of  Jesus. 

iv.  1-26,  The  woman  of  Samaria  and  living  water. 
27-42,  Our  Lord's  ministry  in  Samaria. 

*  Chromlogie^  pn.  651-680.  '^  Apostolic  Age,  pp.  606-621. 

•  Einleitung,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  445  ff. 


338  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

43-54,  Jesus  a  second  time  at  Cana ;  cure  of  the  Capernaum 
nobleman's  son. 

V.  1-9,  Jesus  at  a  feast  in  Jerusalem;  cure  of  the  infirm  man. 

10-18,  The  Jews  complain  of  Sabbath-breaking. 

19-47,  Christ's  reply;  His  claim  to  give  Hfe  from  the  dead; 
testimony  of  the  Scriptures  to  Christ,  who  is  sent  by  the  Father. 

d.  The  Year  from  the  Second  Passover  to  the  Third ;  Jesus 
in  Galilee  J  then  in  Jerusalem  and  the  South  Coufitry^  vi.  i-xi.  57. 

vi.  1-15,  Christ  feeding  the  multitude;  attempt  to  make 
Him  a  king. 

16-21,  Walking  on  the  sea. 

22-59,  Christ  the  bread  of  life;  eating  His  flesh  and  drink- 
ing His  blood. 

60-71,  Many  disciples  leaving  at  the  hard  saying. 

vii.  1-13,  Search  for  Jesus  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles. 

14-24,  Jesus  at  the  feast;  charged  with  demoniacal  pos- 
session. 

25-36,  Attempt  to  seize  Him  and  kill  Him. 

37-44,  Invitation  to  all  who  thirst. 

45-52,  The  officers,  overawed,  refuse  to  arrest  Christ; 
Nicodemus  claims  justice  for  Him. 

[vii.  53-viii.  II,  The  woman  taken  in  adultery.] 

This  passage  is  not  found  in  the  best  MSS.,  and  it  is  rejected  by  biblical 
critics  as  not  part  of  the  gospel.  Still  it  is  very  ancient,  ^  and  very  Christ- 
like. Probably  it  embodies  a  genuine  tradition,  and  perhaps  it  is  taken 
from  some  lost  gospel.  Blass  ascribes  it  to  a  second  edition  of  Luke, 
prepared  by  that  evangelist.'^ 

viii.  12-30,  Contest  concerning  the  claims  of  Christ. 

31-59,  The  Jews  no  longer  Abraham's  children;  Christ's 
claim  to  pre-existence  rejected. 

ix.  1-12,  Cure  of  the  bUnd  man  at  the  Pool  of  Siloam. 

13-41,  Discussion  with  the  Pharisees  about  this  cure  having 
been  on  the  Sabbath  day. 
.     X.  1-2 1,  The  good  shepherd. 

22-39,  At  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication;  the  Jews  attempt 
to  stone  Jesus. 

^  In  the  western  text,  D,  etc. 

2  See  Blass,  Philology  of  the  Gospels ^  p.  163, 


CONTENTS  339 

40-42,  Jesus  beyond  the  Jordan. 

xi.  1-46,  The  raising  of  Lazarus. 

47-53,  On  the  advice  of  Caiaphas,  the  Council  propose  to 
put  Jesus  to  death. 

54-57,  Jesus  in  retirement  at  Ephraim. 

-e.  The  Last  Days  at  Jerusalem^  xii.-xiii. 

xii.  1-8,  Mary  anointing  the  feet  of  Jesus. 

9-1 1,  The  notoriety  of  Lazarus. 

12-19,  The  triumphant  entry. 

2o-36a,  Greeks  desiring  to  see  Jesus;  His  premonition  of 
death ;  the  voice  from  heaven, 

36  b-50,  Jesus  in  retirement;  on  believing  or  rejecting  Christ. 

xiii.  1-20,  At  the  Passover;  Jesus  washing  His  disciples' 
feet ;  the  lesson  about  humility. 

21-30,  The  traitor  pointed  out. 

31-38,  Christ  to  be  glorified  in  death;  Peter  warned. 

f.  The  Last  Discourse  and  Prayer^  xiv.-xvii. 

xiv.,  Seeing  the  Father;  the  promise  of  the  Comforter; 
Christ's  peace. 

XV.,  The  true  vine ;  the  new  commandment. 

xvi..  The  Spirit  of  truth;  the  little  while;  concluding 
assurances. 

xvii.,  Christ's  prayer  of  intercession. 

g.  The  Arrest,  Trials,  Crucifixion,  and  Resurrection,  xviii.-xxi. 
xviii.  i-ii.  The  betrayal  and  arrest  in  the  garden. 

1 2-2  7.  Trial  before  Annas  and  Caiaphas ;  Peter's  denial. 
28-xix.  16,  Trial  before  Pilate,  and  condemnation. 
xix.  1 7-30,  Crucifixion  and  death  of  Jesus. 
31-37,  The  spear-thrust. 
38-42,  The  burial. 

XX.  1-18,  Mary  Magdalene  at  the  tomb,  and  meeting  Jesus. 
19-23,  Jesus  appearing  to  His  disciples. 
24-31,  Thomas'  doubt;  his  faith  on  seeing  Christ;  other 
signs. 

xxi.  I- 1 4,  Appearance  by  the  sea  of  Galilee. 
15-23,  Christ's  questions  for  Peter. 
24,  25,  Appended  notes  of  verification. 


340  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

4.  Characteristics. 

The  fourth  gospel  opens  with  an  introduction,  simple  in 
phrase  but  profound  in  meaning,  which  identifies  the  Word 
with  Christ,  and  traces  the  manifestations  of  the  Word  down 
to  the  Incarnation. 

"The  Logos"  (6  \6yos)  was  a  title  familiar  to  Alexandrian  Jews  from 
its  prominence  in  the  writings  of  Philo,  who  had  derived  it  from  the 
Stoics,  and  used  it  in  the  sense  given  to  it  by  those  earlier  philosophers  as 
the  Divine  /Reason.  So  close  was  the  communication  between  Alexandria 
and  Ephesus,  we  cannot  doubt  that  the  appearance  of  the  term 
in  our  gospel  is  derived  from  Philo.  But  this  applies  to  the  title  itself, 
rather  than  to  its  meaning.  St.  John  understands  it  as  meaning  Word,  not 
Reason,  and  uses  it  in  harmony  with  Palestinian  Jewish  thought,  rather 
than  in  the  Alexandrian  way.  Thus  old  rabbinical  teachings  about  the 
A/emra,  "the  Word  of  the  Lord,"  which  was  almost  taken  to  be  a 
person  and  a  mediator  between  God  and  the  world  in  later  Judaism, 
IS  echoed  in  John's  doctrine  of  the  Logos.  But  this,  in  turn,  is  based 
on  the  O.T.  teaching  about  the  Word  of  the  Lord.  But  John  gives 
it  quite  a  new  form  in  applying  it  to  Christ.  The  chief  differences  between 
John  and  Philo  may  be  stated  as  follows  : — 

(i)  Philo's  Logos  is  Reason  ;  John's  is  Word. 

(2)  ,,         „         impersonal;  ,,      a  Person. 

(3)  »»         »Vv        not  incarnate ;  ,,      incarnate. 

(4)  ,,         »>  \    not  the  Messiah  ;  ,,      the  Messiah. 

St.  John,  or  his  edmir,  tells  us  distinctly  that  his  object  in 
writing  is  to  induce  faith  in  Christ  (xx.  31).  To  that  end 
no  doubt  he  selects  incidents  and  teachings  that  bring  our 
Lord's  Divine  nature  into  view.  He  also  sets  forth  those 
teachings  of  Christ  which  reveal  the  deeper  experiences  of 
the  human  soul  in  relation  to  Christ — the  new  birth,  the 
living  water,  the  light,  the  heavenly  bread,  reaching  a  climax  in 
the  utterances  about  eating  the  flesh  and  drinking  the  blood 
of  the  Son  of  Man.  At  the  same  time  he  shows  how  Christ's 
work  was  carried  on  in  the  midst  of  a  conflict  with  error  and 
direct  opposition.  We  see  throughout  the  darkness  contending 
with  the  light,  but  not  able  to  suppress  it.  It  is  characteristic 
of  John  that  even  the  last  conflict,  in  the  passion  and  death  of 
Christ,  is  described  as  a  glorification.  St.  John  gives  no  account 
of  the  infancy,  the  temptation,  most  of  the  Galilean  ministry, 
the  Lord's  Supper,  the  agony  in  the  garden ;  but  it  is  probable 
that  he  knew  one  or  more  of  the  earlier  gospels,  and  left  those 
works  to  tell  their  own  tale.  It  was  early  recognised  as  the 
"  Spiritual  Gospel."    Yet  it  is  singularly  definite  and  vivid. 


CHAPTER  IV. 
THE   ACTS   OF  THE   APOSTLES 


1.  Authorship. 

2.  Historicity. 

3.  Date. 


4.  Contents. 

5.  Aim  and  Characteristics. 


I.  Authorship. 

This  book  was  unanimously  ascribed  to  St.  Luke  by  the 
early  Church,  and  accepted  as  the  work  of  that  writer  in  all 
subsequent  ages  until  the  rise  of  modern  criticism. 

a.  Internal  Evidence. — It  is  beyond  question  that  the 
author  of  the  third  gospel  was  the  author  of  Acts.  Both 
begin  with  an  introduction  addressed  to  Theophilus,  and  Acts 
refers  to  the  gospel  as  *'  the  former  treatise."  A  similar  style 
is  to  be  traced  through  the  two  works.  If  therefore  we  have 
seen  reason  to  accept  the  Lucan  authorship  of  the  third 
gospel,  that  is  a  justification  for  attributing  Acts  also  to  Luke. 
Then  Acts  has  characteristics  of  its  own  which  well  accord 
with  this  judgment.  It  is  very  Pauline  in  tone,  and  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  it  is  devoted  to  an  account  of  the 
apostle's  journeys,  so  that  we  may  be  sure  that  it  was  written 
by  one  of  his  friends. 

b.  Testmony  of  Ancient  Writers, — The  book  is  acknow- 
ledged as  Luke's  in  writings  dating  soon  after  the  middle 
of  the  second  century.  Irenseus  thus  acknowledges  it,  and 
it  is  ascribed  to  Luke  in  the  Muratorian  Fragment, 

For  Irenaeus's  statements  see  Adv.  Haer.,  iii.  14,  i  ;  15,  i.  Acts  was 
known  to  the  author  of  the  letter  of  the  Churches  at  Lyons  and  Vienne, 
who  cites  St.  Stephen's  dying  words,  though  without  naming  his  authority 
(Eusebius,  H.E.^  v.  2).  There  is  reason  to  think  it  was  known  to 
Justin  Martyr,  though  he  does  not  expressly  cite  it  (/.  Apol.^  49  ;  Tryph., 
20,  68,  1 18).  The  Acts  of  Paul  and  Thccla^  though  an  apocryphal  work, 
must  be  ascribed  to  the  second  century,  and  it  makes  use  of  Acts.  It  is 
needless  to  cite  later  testimony.  Acts  is  in  the  Peshitto  and  the  Old  Latin 
versions. 

341 


342  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

c.  Authorship  of  the  Sections  in  the  First  Person. — Without 
any  explanation  or  introduction  the  author  passes  into  the  use 
of  the  first  person  plural  with  the  pronoun  "we"  in  three 
sections  of  his  book,  viz.,  xvi.  10-18;  xx.  5-xxi.  18;  xxvii.  i- 
xxviii.  16.  The  narration  of  these  portions  begins  at  Troas  and 
goes  on  to  Philippi.  It  returns  on  the  occasion  of  St.  Paul's 
second  visit  to  Philippi,  and  accompanies  him  to  Jerusalem. 
There  it  disappears,  but  it  is  resumed  for  the  apostle's  voyage 
from  Jerusalem  to  Rome.  Thus,  it  would  seem,  St.  Paul  met 
the  author  at  Troas,  took  him  to  Philippi,  and  left  him  there ; 
picked  him  up  again  on  his  return  to  Philippi,  and  had  his 
company  to  Jerusalem,  and  again  after  the  Caesarean  im- 
prisonment for  the  journey  to  Rome.  The  most  probable 
explanation  is  that  St.  Luke  was  the  companion  on  these 
occasions,  and  Professor  Ramsay  suggests  with  some  proba- 
bility that  he  was  a  native  of  Philippi,  and  the  "man  of 
Macedonia"  who  appeared  to  St.  Paul  in  his  night  visions 
at  Troas,  perhaps  after  conversation  with  the  apostle  the 
previous  evening.^  An  alternative  is  that  St.  Luke  here  inserts 
sections  of  some  writing  by  another  person,  and  the  names 
of  Silas  and  Timothy  have  been  proposed.  Neither  will 
fit  the  circumstances:  (i)  Silas  was  with  the  apostle  at 
Philippi;  but  he  disappears  after  this  first  visit  to  Europe, 
and  we  have  no  reason  to  suppose  he  was  with  St.  Paul 
in  his  later  journeys.  (2)  Timothy  was  with  the  apostle 
later;  but  then  he  is  named  in  the  "we"  sections  as  a 
third  person.  Besides,  it  is  quite  contrary  to  St.  Luke's  literary 
method  to  introduce  some  other  writer  without  a  word  of 
explanation.  We  know  he  had  many  sources  for  his  gospel ; 
probably  it  was  the  same  with  Acts.  Yet  he  treats  no  other 
portions  of  his  materials  in  this  way.  He  was  far  too  skilful 
an  author  to  lapse  into  so  crude  and  clumsy  a  method.  There 
is  no  reason  to  deny  these  sections  to  Luke,  who,  we  know, 
was  with  St.  Paul  at  Rome.  (Colossians  iv.  14.)  It  is  natural 
to  suppose  that  he  accompanied  the  apostle  on  his  voyage 

*  St.  Paul,  pp.  200-205. 


HISTORICITY  343 

thither.  Thus  Paul  indirectly  confirms  Luke's  statements. 
Moreover  the  style  of  these  fragments  agrees  with  Luke's  style 
elsewhere. 

2.  Historicity. 

Difficulties  as  to  the  historicity  of  Acts  have  been  suggested 
on  a  variety  of  grounds  : 

a.  Inconsistency  with  the  Theory  of  a  Doctrinal  Schism  in 
the  Church. — This  was  Baur's  great  objection.  Starting  with 
the  theory  of  bitter  antagonism  between  St.  Paul  and  the 
Twelve  Apostles,  and  maintaining  that  this  antagonism 
corresponded  to  two  totally  different  conceptions  of  Christian 
truth,  this  critic  and  his  followers  regarded  Acts  as  a  fancy 
picture  in  which  the  rigour  of  Paul's  anti-Judaism  and  the 
strictness  of  the  older  apostles'  Judaism  are  both  softened 
down  to  agree  with  later  Catholic  unity.  But  it  is  now 
seen  that  the  Tiibingen  school  grossly  exaggerated  the 
difference  between  the  two  lines  of  Christian  teaching. 
Galatians,  in  which  Baur  thought  he  found  the  strongest 
evidences  of  divergence,  really  testifies  to  the  essential  agree- 
ment between  Peter  and  Paul,  both  in  accepting  liberal  views 
with  regard  to  the  Gentiles^  and  in  recognising  one  another's 
claims.2 

b.  Contradictions  to  St.  PauVs  Statements  of  Fact. — It 
must  be  allowed  that  the  difficulties  which  present  themselves 
in  this  relation  are  not  a  little  puzzling.  The  chief  points 
come  out  of  a  comparison  with  Galatians  where  St.  Paul 
describes  his  visits  to  Jerusalem.  It  will  be  best  to  reserve 
them  for  consideration  when  we  are  studying  that  epistle.^ 

c.  Comparison  with  Josephus. — This  is  made  in  two 
opposite  ways.  It  is  said  that  the  author  of  Acts  used 
Josephus,  and  therefore  must  be  much  later  than  St.  Luke  j  it 
is  also  said  that  he  is  inconsistent  with  Josephus — and  there- 
fore is  not  worthy  of  credit.  But  surely  these  two  objections 
cannot  both  be  maintained  at  the  same  time.     If  our  author 

'  See  Gal.  ii.  3,  12.        ^  See  Gal.  i.  24..  ii.  9.        ^  See  chapter  vi. 


344  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

used  Josephus  he  would  not  be  likely  to  contradict  his 
authority;  if  he  contradicted  Josephus  that  would  be  a  sign 
of  independent  authorship — unless  we  say  he  used  the  Jewish 
historian  carelessly,  which  would  be  contrary  to  what  the  pre- 
face to  the  gospel  justifies  us  in  expecting. 

(i)  The  first  point  is  one  of  verbal  resemblances,  and  can  only  be  discussed 
at  length  with  an  elaborate  comparison  of  Greek  words.  Writers  of  the 
same  period,  in  the  same  country,  with  the  same  culture,  dealing  with  his- 
torical events  that  sometimes  coincide,  might  naturally  hit  upon  the  same 
terms.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  comparison  is  with  words  and  phrases, 
not  whole  sentences. 

(2)  The  second  point  comes  up  especially  in  the  report  of  Gamaliel's 
speech,  where  we  read  of  the  insurrections,  first  of  Theudas,  and  then  of 
Judas  of  Galilee  (Acts  v.  36, 37),  Now  according  to  Josephus  the  insurrec- 
tion of  Theudas  took  place  under  Cuspus  Fadus  at  least  ten  years  later 
than  the  period  of  Gamaliel's  speech,  and  long  after  that  of  Judas.  ^  But 
since  St.  Luke  wrote  later  than  the  time  of  Theudas  he  may  have  known  of 
his  name  and  misplaced  it  in  Gamaliel's  speech.  We  must  remember  that 
he  was  not  a  Palestinian.  Still  such  a  blunder  would  tend  to  discredit  his 
accuracy  as  a  historian.  It  is  quite  possible  that  there  was  some  other 
insurgent  named  Theudas  to  whom  the  speech  of  Gamaliel  refers,  for  we 
know  there  were  many  risings  in  these  troublesome  times.'-^  At  all  events 
it  will  not  do  to  say  that  the  author  of  Acts  drew  his  information  from 
Josephus,  and  then  disarranged  it  when  quoting  from  memory,  for  he  tells 
us  that  Theudas  had  a  following  of  400  men,  a  detail  not  in  Josephus. 

d.  Differences  behveeft  the  Earlier  and  the  Later  Parts  of 
Acts. — The  Pauline  part  is  more  easily  accepted  because  of 
the  closer  connection  of  its  author  with  the  events  he  narrates ; 
and  recent  archaeological  discoveries  go  far  to  vindicate  St. 
Luke's  accuracy  as  a  historian  in  this  section  of  his  work.^ 

But  such  a  vindication  must  also  help  to  establish  all  he 
writes.  Moreover,  the  earlier  portion  contains  evidences  of 
its  own  genuineness  in  the  picture  of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem 
that  it  contains.  St.  Peter's  speeches  have  a  very  primitive 
christology,  and  their  references  to  the  death  of  Christ  contain 

*  Aut.  XX.  V.  I.  Yet  it  is  curious  that  Josephus  mentions  this  earlier 
insurrection  after  that  of  Theudas,  though  at  the  same  time  recognising  its 
prior  occurrence — a  fact  that  has  encouraged  the  suggestion  that  the  order 
in  Acts  results  from  a  cursory  glance  at  Josephus.  This  is  too  small  a 
point  to  prove  dependence  on  Josephus.  See  Headlam,  new  Bible.  Die, 
"Acts." 

'  There  were  three  pretenders  named  Judas,  and  four  named  Simon. 
See  Lightfoot  on  Acts  in  Smith's  D.B.^. 

'  See  Ramsay,  Si.  Fault  etc.,  passim. 


CONTENTS  345 

no  hint  of  the  sacrificial  efficacy  of  that  event  which  is  so 
prominent  in  St.  Paul.^ 

3.  Date. 

The  concluding  verses  have  given  rise  to  the  idea  that  Acts 
was  written  at  or  before  the  close  of  St.  Paul's  imprisonment 
there  described.  But  it  must  come  after  the  third  gospel, 
and  that  we  have  seen  was  written  after  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  (a.d.  70).  When  we  allow  time  for  collecting 
materials  after  writing  the  gospel,  we  cannot  well  fix  the  date 
before  a.d.  80.    There  is  no  necessity  to  fix  it  much  later. 

4.  Contents. 

a.  The  Church  at  Jerusalem^  i.  i-viii.  la. 

i.  i-ii,  Introduction;  the  apostolic  commission;  the 
ascension. 

12-26,  Choice  of  a  new  apostle. 

ii.  1-13,  The  gift  of  the  Spirit  with  the  tongues. 

14-42,  Peter's  speech  at  Pentecost. 

43-47,  The  brotherhood  of  the  enlarged  Church. 

iii.  i-io.  Cure  of  a  lame  man. 

11-26,  Peter's  speech  on  this  occasion. 

iv.  1-22,  Peter  and  John  before  the  Council. 

23-37*  Dismissal  and  return  to  the  Church;  the  generosity 
of  the  brotherhood. 

V.  i-ii,  The  lie  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira,  and  their  death. 

12-16,  Miracles  of  healing. 

17-32,  Second  imprisonment  of  Peter  and  John. 

33-42,  Gamaliel's  advice. 

vi.  1-7,  The  appointment  of  the  seven. 

8-15,  Stephen's  ministry  and  arrest. 

vii.  1-53,  Stephen's  defence, 

54-viii.  la,  Stephen's  martyrdom. 

b.  Spread  of  Christianity  in  Judcea  and  Samaria,  viii.  i  b- 

xi.  18. 

1  Spitta  endeavours  to  trace  two  documents  underlying  Acts,  especially 
in  the  earlier  part,  one  of  which  he  attributes  to  Luke.  But  why  not 
regard  both  as  sources  used  by  Luke?  Probably  he  consulted  many 
authorities. 


346  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

viii.  ib-3,  The  Church  scattered  by  persecution. 
4-13,  Philip  in  Samaria  ;  Simon  Magus. 
14-25,  Visit  of  Peter  and  John  to  Samaria. 
26-40,  Philip  and  the  Ethiopian, 
ix.  1-25,  Conversion  of  Paul. 
26-31,  Paul  at  Jerusalem. 

32-43,  Peter  at  Joppa  and  Lydda;  raising  of  Tabitha. 
X.,   Peter  and   Cornelius;    Peter's   trance;    his   speech   at 
Caesarea. 

xi.  I -1 8,  Peter's  explanation  at  Jerusalem. 

c.  Spread  of  Christianity  in  Phoenicia^  Cyprus^  and  Antioch, 
xi.  19-xii.  25. 

xi.  19-30,  Those  scattered  by  the  persecution  carrying  the 
gospel  abroad. 

xii.  Herod's  persecution ;  murder  of  James ;  Peter's  third 
imprisonment  and  escape  ;  death  of  Herod. 

d.  PauVs  First  Missionary  Journey;  associated  with 
Barnabas^  xiii.   i-xv.  35. 

xiii.  1-3,  The  missionary  dedication  of  Barnabas  and  Paul 
by  the  Church  at  Antioch. 

4-12,  Journey  through  Cyprus. 

13-52,  At  Antioch  in  Pisidia;  Paul's  speech  in  the 
synagogue ;  turning  to  the  Gentiles. 

xiv.  1-7,  Preaching  at  Iconium,  and  driven  out  of  the 
town. 

8-28,  Cure  of  a  lame  man  at  Lystra ;  Paul  stoned. 

XV.  1-35,  The  Jerusalem  Church  Council  on  the  question 
of  the  circumcision  of  the  Gentiles. 

e.  PauVs  Second  Missionary  Journey ;  accompanied  by 
SiiaSy  XV.  36-xviii.  22. 

XV.  36-xvi.  5,  Visit  to  the  churches  founded  during  the 
first  journey. 

xvi.  6-40,  Paul  crosses  to  Europe;  imprisonment  at 
Philippi ;  conversion  of  the  jailor. 

xvii.  1-15,  At  Thessalonica  and  Beroea. 

16-34,  At  Athens;  speech  at  the  Areopagus. 

xviii.  1-17,  At  Corinth;  brought  before  Gallic. 


AIM  AND  CHARACTERISTICS         347 

18-22,  Paul  travels  by  Ephesus  and  Caesarea  to  Antioch. 

f.  PauVs  Third  Missionary  Journey^  xviii.  23-xxi.  16. 
23-28,  Paul  revisiting   Galatia  and  Phrygia;   Apollos   at 

Corinth. 

xix.,  Paul  at  Ephesus ;  the  riot. 

XX.  1-6,  Journey  to  Macedonia  and  Greece. 

7-12,  Paul  at  Troas  ;  Eutychus'  fall,  and  restoration. 

^3-38*  Journey  to  Miletus;  Paul  meets  the  elders  of 
Ephesus  there. 

xxi.  1-16,  Voyage  to  Tyre  and  Caesarea. 

g.  PauVs  Arrest  at  Jerusalem^  Imprisonment  at  desarea, 
and  Voyage  to  Rome^  xxi.  i']  to  the  end. 

xxi.  17-26,  Paul  with  the  Jerusalem  Church. 

27-40,  The  Jews  try  to  kill  Paul;  He  is  rescued  and 
conveyed  to  the  castle. 

xxii.  1-2 1,  Speech  before  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem. 

22-30,  Paul  with  the  chief  captain. 

xxiii.  i-io,  Paul  before  the  council. 

11-35,  Taken  to  Caesarea. 

xxiv.,  Paul  before  Felix. 

XXV.,  xxvi.,  Paul  before  Festus;  appeal  to  Caesar;  speech 
before  Agrippa. 

xxvii.,  Voyage  and  shipwreck. 

xxviii.  i-io,  Paul  at  Melita. 

11-16,  Journey  to  Rome. 

17-31,  Paul  expounds  his  gospel  at  Rome. 

5.  Aim  and  Characteristics. 

In  his  preface  St.  Luke  states  his  aim,  or  rather  illustrates 
it  from  the  commission  to  the  apostles,  viz.,  to  show  the 
ever-widening  circles  of  the  spread  of  Christianity  (i.  8). 
It  will  be  observed  that  he  carries  this  intention  into  effect ; 
the  plan  of  the  book  shows  us  first  the  Jerusalem  Church, 
then  the  Judaean  evangelisation,  next  that  of  Samaria,  after 
this  the  great  advance  into  the  Gentile  world,  beginning 
with  Antioch,  the  centre  of  Gentile  missionary  work,  and 
going  on  with  the  journeys  of  St.  Paul,  the  great  evangehst 


348  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

of  the  Gentiles,  until  he  is  seen  planting  the  gospel  in  Rome, 
the  head  city  of  the  world.  But  while  this  is  the  first  object 
aimed  at,  it  would  seem  that  the  author's  ultimate  design 
is  to  commend  the  gospel  to  his  readers  by  exhibiting  its 
gracious  aspects  and  its  great  fruitfulness.  He  seems 
especially  to  have  the  Roman  world  in  view.  Roman 
officials  invariably  appear  in  a  favourable  light,  military 
officers  especially  so;  and  this  is  in  marked  contrast  with 
the  fierce  antagonism  of  the  Jews  and  their  leaders,  from 
whom  in  every  case  the  persecution  of  the  Christians  arises 
— excepting  in  one  or  two  instances  of  riots  among  pagan 
mobs,  on  the  incitement  of  men  actuated  by  trade  interests. 
This  conciliatory  treatment  of  the  Roman  world  constitutes 
the  book  in  a  sense  an  Apologia.  But  there  is  no  reason 
to  question  the  truthful  character  of  the  narrative  on  that 
account.  It  was  calumny  and  misunderstanding  that  first 
prejudiced  the  pagan  world  against  the  Church.  A  "plain, 
unvarnished  tale  "  was  the  best  way  to  prevent  the  growth  of 
senseless  prejudices, 


CHAPTER  V. 
THE   PAULINE   EPISTLES:    FIRST   GROUP 

1.  The  Thirteen  Epistles.  I  3.   i  Thessalonians. 

2.  The  Thessalonian  Christians.      |  4.  2  Thessalonians. 

I.  The  Thirteen  Epistles. 

Thirteen  epistJes  are  commonly  ascribed  to  St.  Paul.  A 
fourteenth — the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  which  bears  the 
apostle's  name  in  its  title  in  our  English  Bibles — is  now 
almost  universally  considered  to  be  the  work  of  some  other 
author.^  These  books  naturally  fall  into  four  groups,  deter- 
mined both  by  their  characters  and  contents,  and  by  the 
periods  when  they  were  written.  The  works  of  St.  Paul — 
at  all  events  those  that  have  been  preserved  to  our  own 
day — are  not  distributed  evenly  over  the  apostle's  career. 
Supposing  his  conversion  to  have  occurred  about  a.d.  35, 
we  have  eighteen  years  before  the  first  epistle  was  written. 
Then  come  four  literary  periods  : — 

First.  A.D.  53,  I  and  2  Thessalonians. 

Second,  a.d.  57,  58,  i  and  2  Corinthians,  Galatians, 
Romans. 

Third,  a.d.  62,  63,  Ephesians,  Colossians,  Philemon, 
Phihppians. 

Fourth.  A.D.  65,  Titus,  i  and  2  Timothy,  />.,  if  we  admit 
the  genuineness  of  the  pastoral  epistles,  or  of  portions  of 
them. 

^  The  full  titles  of  the  N.T.  books  in  our  English  Bibles  are  quite 
late  in  their  origin.  They  are  not  found  in  the  oldest  MSS.,  which 
give  much  shorter  titles,  and  therefore  they  cannot  claim  any  authority. 
In  the  text  itself  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  does  not  claim  to  be  written 
by  St.  Paul.  Since  no  author's  name  appears  in  it,  the  question  as  to 
who  wrote  it,  which  will  be  considered  later  on,  does  not  affect  its 
genuineness. 

349 


350  BIBLICAL   LNTRODUCTION 

These  dates  are  most  of  them  only  approximate.  But  when  once  the 
general  scheme  of  chronology  which  they  follow  is  accepted,  they  fall 
into  their  places  with  sufficient  accuracy  to  exclude  more  than  about 
a  year's  variation  either  forward  or  backward.  Specific  questions  con- 
cerning the  dates  of  the  several  books  will  be  considered  as  they  arise. 
In  other  schemes  of  chronology  these  epistles  still  preserve  their  relative 
positions  but  little  altered.     They  are  arranged  by  Hamack  ^  as  follows  : — 

48/9  (47/8),  I  and  2  Thessalonians. 
53  (52),  I  Corinthians,  Galatians. 
53  (52),  Early  autumn,  2  Corinthians. 
53/54,  Romans. 

57-59  (56-58),  Colossians,  Philemon,  Epliesians  (if  genuine),  Philip- 
pians. 

59-64,  Genuine  Pauline  elements  of  the  pastoral  epistles. 

Certain  common  characteristics  may  be  traced  with  more  or 
less  distinctness  through  all  the  Pauline  epistles.  They  are 
real  letters,  impressed  with  the  personality  of  the  writer,  taking 
cognizance  of  the  circumstances  of  the  people  to  whom  they 
are  directed;  in  form  opening  with  the  style  of  address 
current  at  the  time,  though  enriched  with  deeper  meaning, 
and  closing  as  a  rule  with  personal  salutations ;  in  spirit 
breathing  a  warmly  affectionate  feeling  for  the  readers,  and 
a  deep,  passionate  concern  for  the  issues  at  stake.  At  the 
same  time  they  all  deal  with  matters  of  religion,  varying  in 
relative  proportion,  but  still,  in  nearly  every  case  discussing 
doctrinal  points,  describing  processes  of  spiritual  experience, 
and  giving  direct  advice  on  practical  questions.  It  may  be 
said  that  St.  Paul  created  this  style  of  literature — since  been 
imitated  by  Cyprian,  F^n(^lon,  and  others — in  which  the  most 
serious  religious  truths  and  the  most  momentous  actions  of 
hfe  are  discussed  in  letters.^ 

St.  Paul  was  in  the  habit  of  dictating  his  letters  to  an 
amanuensis,  possibly  owing  to  weakness  of  eyesight,  or  per- 
haps because  the  rough  work  of  his  handicraft  rendered  his 
fingers  unapt  at  holding  the  pen.     In  Romans  xvi.   22  the 

^  Chronologie,  pp.  233-239. 

*  The  great  originality  of  this  kind  of  literature  has  been  put  forward  as 
an  argument  against  the  early  date  of  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  because  if 
that  is  earlier  than  the  first  of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  St.  James  must  be 
credited  with  the  invention.  But  that  epistle  must  be  considered  before 
we  yield  the  point. 


THE   PAULINE   EPISTLES  351 

amanuensis,  who  gives  his  name  as  Tertius,  appends  his  own 
greeting.  The  apostle  emphasises  the  fact  that  he  writes  the 
short  personal  letter  to  Philemon  with  his  own  hand  (Phile- 
mon 19),  and  in  appending  a  postscript  to  the  epistle  to  the 
Galatians  (vi.  11-18)  he  calls  attention  to  the  large  size  of  his 
letters  in  comparison  with  his  secretary's  neat  handwriting. 
From  2  Thessalonians  iii.  17  we  learn  that  it  was  the  apostle's 
custom  to  authenticate  his  letters  by  adding  a  few  words  him- 
self. In  this  case  it  is  a  salutation  followed  by  the  final 
benediction  (verses  17,  18).  So  the  apostle  points  out  that  he 
writes  i  Corinthians  xvi.  21-24,  and  Colossians  iv.  18,  in  his 
own  hand.  Possibly — as  Weiss  suggests — the  doxology  in 
Romans  (vi.  25-27),  the  final  benediction  in  Ephesians 
(xvi.  23,  24),  the  greetings  in  PhiHppians  (iv.  21-23),  ^"d 
perhaps  2  Corinthians  xiii.  12-14,  and  i  Timothy  vi.  20,  21, 
were  written  by  St.  Paul  himself.  It  was  often  the  practice  of 
the  apostle  to  associate  his  travelling  companions  and  fellow 
missionaries  with  himself  in  his  writing  {e.g.y  1  Thessalonians 
i.  I  ;  2  Thessalonians  i.  i,  etc.).  But  he  soon  relapsed  into 
the  first  person  singular,  and  he  always  wrote  on  his  own  in- 
dividual apostolic  authority. 

Besides  these  thirteen  epistles  there  is  reason  to  believe  that 
St.  Paul  wrote  others  that  have  been  lost.  Two  in  particular 
are  directly  alluded  to — one  epistle  to  the  Corinthians  earlier 
than  our  i  Corinthians  (mentioned  in  i  Corinthians  v.  9),  and 
one  to  the  Laodiceans  (mentioned  in  Colossians  iv.  16). 
Probably  the  extant  epistles  contain  fragments  of  lost  epistles. 
In  particular  Romans  xvi.  appears  to  be  part  of  an  epistle  to 
Ephesus,^  and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  2  Corinthians 
consists  of  two  epistles — in  whole  or  part — run  together. 2 
On  the  other  hand  it  can  scarcely  be  supposed  that  any  large, 
important  epistle  has  been  lost.  In  all  probability  such  a 
work  would  have  left  traces  in  early  Church  history.  The 
most  ancient  writers  who  quote  from  St.  Paul  with  acknow- 
ledgement only  cite  what  is  in  our  N.T. 

Of  our  thirteen  epistles  nine  are  addressed  to  churches,  four 
^  See  pages  379,  380.  "^  See  page  368. 


352  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

to  individual  men.  Of  the  nine  to  churches  some  are  sent  to 
single  communities,  e.g.,  Romans;  others  are  for  a  group  of 
churches,  e.g,^  Galatians,  probably  Ephesians,  and  also  in  a 
measure  2  Corinthians,  which,  though  primarily  to  Corinth,  is 
also  directed  to  "all  the  saints  that  are  in  the  whole  of 
Achaia"  (2  Corinthians  i.  i).  Letters  to  churches  were  to 
be  read  to  all  the  members.  This  is  apparent  throughout. 
It  is  expressly  stipulated  with  regard  to  the  first  written  letter 
(i  Thessalonians  v.  27).  Of  the  four  epistles  to  individual 
men  three  are  of  a  pastoral  character,  and  therefore  essentially 
of  public  interest  to  the  churches  (i  and  2  Timothy  and 
Titus).  One  is  a  wholly  private  and  personal  letter  (Phile- 
mon). 

2.  The  Thessalonian  Christians. 

The  two  epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  are  evidently 
addressed  to  the  same  community,  consisting  of  the  converts 
whom  St.  Paul  had  won  on  the  occasion  of  his  first  visit  to 
Europe,  when,  crossing  over  the  sea  from  Troas  and  landing  at 
Neapolis,  he  had  first  visited  Philippi,  and  then  directed  his 
course  southwards  to  Thessalonica.  This  city — the  modern 
Salonica — situated  at  the  north-east  corner  of  the  Thermaic 
Gulf,  was  the  capital  of  one  of  the  Roman  divisions  of 
Macedonia,  a  large  place  containing  a  considerable  industrial 
population,  and  some  thousands  of  Jews  who  had  an  im- 
portant synagogue  there.  According  to  his  custom,  the 
apostle  first  preached  to  the  Jews;  after  his  third  Sabbath 
visit  to  the  synagogue,  being  rejected  by  his  own  people,  he 
turned  to  the  Gentiles. 

It  has  been  objected  that  such  a  church  as  the  epistles  concern  could 
not  have  been  formed  in  so  short  a  time.  But  this  is  to  overlook  the  fact 
that  the  apostle  may  have  stayed  some  weeks  or  even  months  longer 
preaching  among  the  Gentiles.  Acts  xvi.  4  seems  to  imply  as  much.  From 
this  verse  we  gather  that  there  were  a  few  Jew  converts,  but  that  the 
majority  were  Greeks,  i.e.,  Greek-speaking  Gentiles.  By  race  these 
people  were  of  the  solid,  reliable  Thracian  race  ^ — they  had  been  wor- 
shippers of  idols  { I  Thessalonians  i.  9).  It  is  interesting  to  find  that  the 
apostle  found  his  most  loyal  converts  among  these  worthy  people.  In 
particular  there  were  men  already  "God-fearing"  {ae^ofiivuv^  Acts  xvii.  4), 

*  See  Renan,  Sf.  Paul,  chapter  vi. 


I    THESSALONIANS  353 

i.e^  in  a  measure  proselytes,  brought  to  reverence  the  God  of  the  Jews, 
and  also  a  number  of  women  of  the  wealthier  classes,  who  afterwards 
contributed  to  the  maintenance  of  the  apostle.^ 

A  riot  stirred  up  by  the  Jews  compelled  the  apostle  to  leave 
the  city  suddenly,  perhaps  bound  over  by  the  authorities  to 
absent  himself. 

3.  1  Thessalonians. 

a.  Genuineness. — This  epistle  is  growing  in  favour  and 
general  acceptance.  Baur  rejected  it,  but  his  successor, 
Hilgenfeld,  accepts  it.  Its  genuineness  has  also  been  allowed 
by  critics  of  such  diverse  schools  as  Pfleiderer,  Holtzmann, 
Davidson,  Harnack,  Jiilicher,  Zahn.  The  external  testimony 
is  as  good  as  could  be  expected  for  so  short  a  work.  It  is  in 
Marcion's  canon  of  St.  Paul's  epistles  {c.  a.d.  140),  and  is 
quoted  by  Fathers  of  the  second  century,  and  it  is  in  the 
earliest  versions  of  the  N.T.,  also  dating  from  the  second 
century. 

No  certain  allusion  to  this  epistle  can  be  found  in  the  apostolic  fathers ; 
but  that  is  the  case  with  most  of  the  epistles.  They  were  not  collected 
into  a  volume,  or  widely  known  at  the  early  date  of  these  witnesses. 
Neither  does  their  high  authority  seem  to  have  been  then  recognised. 
Still  Ignatius  may  have  known  our  epistle.  His  Ephesians  x.  i  suggests 
I  Thessalonians  v.  17  ;  compare  also  his  Epistle  to  Polycarp  i.  3.  Perhaps 
his  Pkilippians  ii.  I  alludes  to  i  Thessalonians  v.  5.^  The  Testimony  of 
the  Twelve  Patriarchs ^  Levi.  6,  seems  to  allude  to  i  Thessalonians  vi.  16. 

Irenaeus  is  the  first  to  quote  the  epistle  by  name  {Con,  Haer.,  v.  6. 
1  =  1  Thessalonians  v.  23).  See  also  v.  30.  2.  At  the  end  of  the  first 
century,  Clement  of  Alexandria  makes  use  of  it  {Paed.^  v.  19;  Strom. ^ 
i«  9«  53)-  So  does  Tertullian  {De.  Res.  Carn.y  c.  24).  The  epistle  is 
recognised  in  the  Muratorian  Fragment^  and  it  is  found  in  the  Old  Latin 
and  Syriac  versions. 

The  internal  evidence  in  favour  of  it  is  strong.  It  bears 
the  stamp  of  the  apostle's  earnest,  affectionate  character,  and 
it  fits  well  into  the  circumstances  under  which  it  was  written. 
In  particular,  the  reference  to  some  Christians  at  Thessalonica 
who  had  died  points  to  a  very  ancient  date.    The  brethren  were 

*  See  Ramsay,  St.  Paul  the  Traveller ^  etc.^  p.  227. 

*  In  regard  to  this  last  comparison  it  has  been  objected  that  the  word 
I'  unceasing  "  is  not  represented  in  the  Syriac  version  of  Ignatius.  That 
is  no  valid  objection,  as  it  is  now  known  that  in  the  Syriac  form  the 
Ignatian  letters  are  quite  mutilated  and  abbreviated. 

2    A 


'354  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

disappointed  and  disconcerted  by  the  occurrence,  apparently 
having  supposed  that  Christ's  near  advent  was  not  to  be 
preceded  by  the  death  of  any  of  His  people.  This  is  a 
delusion  that  could  only  have  been  entertained  in  a  very 
early  stage  of  a  church's  existence.  The  need  the  apostle 
found  for  dispeUing  it  and  comforting  those  who  were  troubled 
by  it  stamps  the  epistle  as  most  primitive. 

(i)  It  was  objected  by  Baur  that  the  epistle  lacked  Pauline  doctrinal 
statements.  But  this  fact  only  points  to  its  antiquity,  before  the  rise 
of  the  great  contest  with  Judaisers,  or  it  may  be  accounted  for  by  the 
fact  that  this  contest  was  not  known  at  Thessalonica.  And  the  very 
simplicity  of  the  epistle  makes  for  its  genuineness.  There  was  no  motive 
for  forging  it.  (2)  ii.  16  has  been  referred  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
(a.d.  70).  It  is  too  general  to  be  forced  to  such  an  application.  (3) 
Apparent  inconsistencies  with  Acts  have  been  pointed  out.  But  similar 
and  even  greater  difficulties  are  felt  with  Galatiaus,  which  is  accepted,  and 
it  is  therefore  not  necessary  to  discuss  them  here.^  (4)  A  more  serious  diffi- 
culty may  be  felt  in  the  time  which  seems  to  have  been  required  for  the 
growth  and  development  of  the  Church.  But  in  epochs  of  religious  revival 
life  moves  fast,  and  events  follow  one  another  rapidly.  The  reference  to 
deaths  will  not  allow  of  much  time.  Some  must  have  occurred  in  the 
course  of  nature  before  long. 

b.  Place^  Date^  ajid  Ciraimsiances  of  Origin, — By  com- 
paring Acts  xvii.  and  xviii.  with  our  epistle  we  can  settle 
these  points  with  tolerable  accuracy.  St.  Paul  had  left 
Timothy  and  Silas  in  Macedonia  (Acts  xvii.  14)  when  he 
went  on  with  other  friends  to  Athens,  whence  he  sent 
back  a  request  that  they  should  follow  him  (verse  15). 
They  did  not  reach  him  until  he  had  passed  on  to  Corinth. 
(Acts  xviii.  I  and  5.)  They  are  with  him  when  he  writes 
the  epistle  (i  Thessalonians  i.  i),  Timothy  having  just  arrived 
(iii.  6). 

It  would  seem,  however,  from  this  epistle  that  Acts  is  not  perfectly 
accurate  on  one  point.  St.  Paul  here  says  that  he  thought  it  well  to 
be  left  at  Athens  alone,  and  that  he  sent  Timothy  to  Thessalonica 
(i  Thessalonians  iii.  i,  2),  who  had  since  returned  (verse  6).  This, 
however,  is  a  minor  point.  Possibly  Timothy  had  met  the  apostle 
earlier  than  St.  Luke  supposed,  and  had  been  sent  back,  or  possibly 
he  had  been  of  those  who  accompanied  St.  Paul  to  Athens,  though 
St.  Luke,  knowing  he  was  at  Thessalonica  a  little  later,  had  concluded 
that  he  had  remained  in  Macedonia. 

*  For  a  discussion  of  these  points  the  reader  is  referred  to  Jowett, 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians,  etc.     Third  edition,  pp.  4-17. 


I   THESSALOxNIANS  355 

Thus  we  find  the  epistle  was  written  from  Corinth  on  the 
occasion  of  the  apostle's  first  visit  to  the  city  (probably  in 
A.D.  53).  The  reason  for  writing  it  is  found  in  the  coming 
of  Timothy  with  news  from  Thessalonica.  The  apostle 
wished  to  encourage  his  friends  whom  he  had  left  so 
abruptly,  to  help  them  with  practical  advice  as  to  their 
conduct  in  daily  life,  and  especially  to  relieve  them  from  the 
perplexity  occasioned  by  the  death  of  some  of  their  brother- 
hood. 

c.  Contents. — The  epistle  opens  with  a  salutation,  including 
Silvanus  and  Timothy  with  himself  in  the  message  of  greeting 

(i.  I). 

i.  2-10,  Thanksgiving  and  congratulation.  The  gospel  has 
borne  good  fruit  in  Thessalonica,  the  fame  of  which  extends 
through  Macedonia  and  Achaia,  and  beyond. 

ii.  1-12,  Reminiscences  of  the  apostle's  ministry  at 
Thessalonica,  its  boldness  (verse  2),  its  purity  (verse  3), 
its  honesty  (verses  4-6),  its  gentleness  (verses  7,  8),  its 
gratuitousness  —  the  missionaries  supporting  themselves  by 
manual  labour  (verse  9),  their  blameless  example  (verse  10), 
and  their  affectionate,  fatherly  treatment  of  their  converts 
(verses  11,  12). 

ii.  13-16,  Thanksgiving  again  for  the  way  the  Thessalo- 
nians  received  the  gospel  as  the  word  of  God,  and  con- 
gratulations on  their  endurance  of  persecution  from  the 
Jews. 

ii.  17-20,  The  apostle's  eager  desire  to  see  his  friends.  But 
he  is  hindered  by  Satan. 

"  Satan  hindered. "  This  might  refer  to  some  illness  {e.g. ,  2  Corinthians 
xii.  7) ;  but  more  likely  St.  Paul  alludes  to  Satan  as  a  ruling  power  of  evil 
working  through  adverse  circumstances,  as  in  a  magisterial  order  excluding 
the  apostle  from  Macedonia. 

iii.  i-io,  As  St.  Paul  could  not  go  himself,  he  had  sent 
Timothy  who  had  returned  with  cheering  news. 

iii.  11-13,  The  apostle  still  prays  that  God  will  direct  his 
way  to  the  Thessalonians,  that  he  may  establish  their  hearts 
unblameable  in  holiness. 


356  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

iv.  1-8,  The  apostle  encourages  obedience  to  the  precepts 
preached,  and  adds  an  exhortation  against  uncleanness. 

iv.  9-12,  Exhortation  to  quiet  work. 

iv.  13-18,  Explanation  of  the  state  of  the  blessed  dead. 
The  Thessalonians,  surprised  that  some  of  their  number  had 
died  before  Christ  came  a  second  time,  feared  they  would 
miss  the  joy  of  the  Parousia.  It  will  not  be  so.  On  the 
contrary  the  dead  in  Christ  will  rise  and  see  Christ  before 
the  Christians  who  are  on  earth  at  the  time  will  have  that 
privilege.  Then  the  living  Christians  will  be  caught  up  in 
the  clouds,  and  join  them. 

At  this  time  St.  Paul  expected  to  be  of  the  living  at  the  Parousia.  Later 
he  gave  up  the  expectation,  and  anticipated  death  for  himself.  (2  Corinthians 
V.  I ;  Philippians  1.  2 1.) 

v.  1-3,  The  sudden  coming  of  the  Lord. 

v.  4-11,  Call  for  watchfulness  and  sobriety  with  the  hope  of 
the  salvation  through  Christ  who  died  for  us. 

V.  12-22,  Various  exhortations,  first  to  treat  the  leaders  of 
the  Church  well,  and  to  live  in  peace  together,  and  then  con- 
cerning specific  Christian  duties. 

Note  in  particular:  (i)  Verse  12,  no  titles  are  given.  We 
have  no  mention  of  bishops,  elders,  or  deacons  by  name 
in  any  of  these  early  epistles.  But  the  verse  seems  to 
point  to  Church  officers.  (2)  Verses  19,  20  refer  to  the 
prophetic  gifts.  They  are  not  to  be  checked  or  despised, 
but  tested,  and  what  is  proved  to  be  good,  held  to. 

V.  23-28,  Final  commendations  and  exhortations. 

The  epistle  is  simple  and  practical  in  character.  Nevertheless  it 
indirectly  indicates  the  following  ideas :  The  Divinity  of  Christ  (i.  I, 
10;  iii.  II,  12;  V.  28);  His  death  (ii.  15),  as  concerning  us  {-Tepl  ^/twy, 
V.  10) ;  His  resurrection  as  God's  act  {8p  i^yeipev,  i.  10),  the  second 
advent  (frequently  referred  to)  j  the  Holy  Spirit  given  by  God  (iv.  8), 
to  work  in  Christians  (i.  5 ;  v.  19)  ;  Christian  union  with  Christ 
(iv.  14,  16 ;  V.  10) ;  the  resurrection  of  Christians  (iv.  14) ;  Satan 
as  a  hindering  power  (ii.  18)  ;  various  duties  of  the  Christian  life, 
especially  love,  purity,  and  honest  industry;  some  undefined  Church 
government  calling  for  respect  towards  its  leaders  (v,  12).  No  reference 
to  Judaising  Christians.     The  opponents  are  Jews. 


2  THESSALONIANS  357 

4.  2  Thessalonians. 

a.  Genuineness. — This  epistle  is  rejected  by  some  who 
admit  i  Thessalonians,  e.g.y  by  Hilgenfeld.  It  is  well  de- 
fended by  Jowett  {Thessalonians^  etc.y  3rd  edition,  pp.  70-76). 
The  external  evidence  is  even  stronger  than  that  for  i  Thes- 
salonians, the  epistle  being  alluded  to  by  Polycarp  in  the 
middle  of  the  second  century,  and  apparently  by  Justin 
Martyr.     Irenaeus  is  the  first  to  name  it. 

Compare  Polycarp,  Ad.  PktL,  ii.  with  2  Thessalonians  iii.  15  ;  Justin 
Martyr,  Trypho.,  no  with  2  Thessalonians  ii.  3.  For  the  first  direct 
mention  of  the  epistle  see  Irenaeus,  Con.  Haer.^  iii.  7,  2.  It  is  also  cited 
by  Clement  A.  (Strom.,  v.  3),  Tertullian  {De.  Res.  Carn.^  24;  Scorp,  13). 
It  is  in  Marcion's  canon,  the  Muratorian  Fragment,  the  Old  Latin  and 
the  Syriac  versions.     It  was  never  questioned  in  the  early  Church. 

The  internal  evidence  in  favour  of  this  epistle  is  similar  to 
that  for  the  first,  in  the  suitability  to  the  circumstances,  the 
affectionate,  earnest  character  of  the  writer,  etc.  Over  and 
above  objections  that  it  shares  with  i  Thessalonians,  the 
following  have  been  urged  against  the  genuineness  of  2  Thes- 
salonians^ : — 

(i)  Its  eschatology  appears  to  contradict  i  Thessalonians, 
where  we  read  that  the  Son  of  man  will  come  suddenly,  (i  Thes- 
salonians v.  2.)  Here  delay  and  intermediate  occurrences  are 
predicted.  (2  Thessalonians  ii.  1-3.)  But  is  this  a  contradic- 
tion ?  Suddenness  is  not  immediateness.  The  thief  in  the 
night  startles  the  house  with  his  unexpected  presence ;  but  his 
coming  may  still  not  be  soon.  If  we  knew  it  would  be,  we 
should  not  be  startled.  And  would  a  literary  imitator  create 
this  difficulty  ?  Besides,  St.  Paul  may  have  modified  his  ideas 
while  brooding  over  this  subject  between  the  two  epistles. 

(2)  The  doctrine  of  antichrist  is  said  to  be  un-Pauline, 
dependent  on  the  Apocalypse,  and  perhaps  here  even  savour- 
ing of  Montanism  (second  century).  That  St.  Paul  does  not 
discuss  it  in  his  later  writings  is  quite  true.  His  whole 
position  in  regard  to  the  second  advent  underwent  gradual 
transformation.     But  if  Matthew  xxiv.  is  history,  the  seed  of 

1  Pfleiderer,  Urchristenthuniy  pp.  77,  78. 


358  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

this  doctrine  was  in  the  teaching  of  Christ  Himself.  More- 
over, St.  Paul,  trained  in  Jewish  literature,  would  not  be 
ignorant  of  the  Apocalyptic  ideas  of  his  own  people.  Jiilicher 
holds  that  his  writing  on  this  subject  is  based  on  his  earlier 
Jewish  training,  utilised  in  Christian  thought.^ 

(3)  The  concluding  authentication  (iii.  17)  is  objected  to  as 
unlike  St.  Paul's  manner,  and  a  needless  precaution  if  the 
apostle  dictates  the  letter  himself.  It  is  not  probable  that 
false  letters  had  been  sent  to  Thessalonica  thus  early.  But 
we  need  not  take  the  passage  to  imply  that  this  was  the  case. 
St.  Paul  was  guarding  against  possible  contingencies.  Still,  it 
must  be  admitted,  the  passage  is  peculiar,  and  not  easily 
accounted  for. 

(4)  There  are  variations  from  the  apostle's  style. ^  On  the 
other  hand  the  writer  is  said  to  imitate  St.  Paul.  Spitta 
assigns  the  epistle  to  Timothy.  But  if  that  is  a  correct 
surmise  is  it  not  very  remarkable  that  no  tradition  preserved 
the  title  of  so  well  known  a  Christian  leader  ?  Still,  as  one  of 
the  associated  senders  of  the  epistle  (i.  i),  Timothy  may  have 
had  some  hand  in  it,  possibly  as  the  amanuensis  allowing  him- 
self some  freedom  in  the  shaping  of  phrases. 

b.  Time  and  Circumstances  of  Origin.  —  Baur  followed 
Grotius  in  placing  this  epistle  earlier  than  our  i  Thessalonians. 
The  principal  grounds  for  this  view  (which  was  adopted  by 
Renan,  Ewald,  and  others)  is  found  in  the  references  of 
2  Thessalonians  to  the  teaching  of  the  apostle  while  he  was 
yet  with  his  converts.  In  any  case,  it  could  not  have  been 
written  long  after  he  had  been  present,  ii.  2  seems  to  refer  to 
the  earlier  epistle — though  the  expression  "by  epistle  as  (ws) 
from  us  "  rather  suggests  one  that  pretended  to  come  from  the 
apostle,  but  was  not  really  sent  by  him;  and  the  allusion 
further  on  to  "traditions  which  ye  were  taught,  whether  by 
word  or  by  epistle  of  ours '^  (ii.  15),  seems  to  point  clearly 
to  some  previous  epistle.     But  the  chief  reason  for  putting 

^  Einleitungy  p.  43. 

^  For  a  full  list  of  these  variations,  and  a  discussion  of  them,  see 
JOWETT,  Thessalonians f  etc.,  p.  73. 


2   THESSALONIANS  359 

this  second  is  that  it  clears  up  a  difficulty  which  the  earliei 
epistle  left  behind,  especially  if  ii.  2  refers  to  that  epistle. 
The  Thessalonians  were  so  full  of  the  immediate  coming  of 
Christ,  that  some  of  them  ceased  to  work  for  their  livelihood 
(iii.  10.)  This  error  the  apostle  corrects,  and  he  shows  that 
the  advent  is  not  to  be  so  near.  The  epistle  cannot  have 
been  written  long  after  its  predecessor.  Its  references  to  the 
time  when  St.  Paul  was  with  his  readers  do  not  allow  of 
that,  and  the  same  companions  (Silvanus  and  Timothy)  are 
associated  with  the  apostle,  (i.  i.)  iii.  2  seems  to  point  to  the 
events  described  in  Acts  xviii.  12  ff.  We  should  date  it  there- 
fore from  Corinth,  and  probably  in  A.D.  53,  possibly  in  54. 

c.   Contents. 

i.  I,  2,  Opening  salutation. 

3-12,  Thanksgiving  for  spiritual  growth,  and  congratulations 
on  the  patient  endurance  of  persecution. 

ii.  1-12,  Apocalyptic  passage.  A  warning  against  anticipat- 
ing the  immediate  advent  of  Christ.  The  man  of  sin  must 
first  be  revealed.  At  present  he  is  restrained.  But  in  time 
the  restraining  power  will  be  removed. 

13-17,  Renewed  thanksgiving  and  exhortation  to  steadfast- 
ness. 

iii.  1-5,  A  request  for  the  prayers  of  the  Thessalonians, 
followed  by  an  expression  of  assurance  that  they  will  be  kept 
and  directed  by  God. 

6-15,  Withdrawal  from  disorderly  brethren  required.  The 
apostle  had  worked  for  his  own  living;  his  converts  must 
all  work  for  their  living,  and  none  of  them  burden  their 
brethren. 

16,  17,  Concluding  salutation  in  the  apostle's  own  hand, 
following  a  benediction. 

The  Man  of  Sin^  ii.  1-12. — In  the  main  there  are  two  distinct  views  of 
this  mysterious  passage,  (i)  That  the  man  of  sin  is  the  Roman  Emperor, 
Caligwla,  or  more  probably  Nero,  who  is  in  hiding  (see  Tacitus,  Hist.,  ii.  8), 
restrained  by  the  ruling  Emperor  Vespasian.  According  to  this  view,  the 
epistle  is  a  later  work,  and  not  genuine.  *  *  Setting  himself  forth  as  God  " 
(verse  4)  seems  to  point  to  the  self-deification  of  the  Roman  emperor. 
(2)  That  the  man  of  sin  is  a  personification  of  the  Jewish  power.  This 
fits  in  with  the  situation  when  St.  Paul  was  at  Corinth.    The  Jews  resist  the 


S6o  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

progreu  of  the  gos|Xil.  The  restraining  power  is  that  of  the  Roman 
Government,  which  had  been  exercised  both  at  Thessalonica  when  the 
apostle  was  there,  and  more  recently  at  Corinth  under  Gallio.  (Acts  xviii. 
12-17.)  The  phrase,  "he  that  sitteth  in  the  temple  of  God"  (2  Thcs- 
salonians  ii.  4),  suits  the  Jews  better  than  a  pagan  emperor.  It  must  be 
understood  that  the  phrase  "mystery  of  iniquity"  (ii.  7)  means  not  a 
mysterious,  turbulent  power,  but  one,  the  latent  evil  of  which  is  now 
known.  Ililgenfeld,  placing  the  diroaraala  in  the  time  of  Trajan,  under- 
stands the  "mystery  of  iniquity"  to  refer  to  gnosticism,  and  so  ascribes 
the  writing  of  the  epistle  to  the  second  century.  It  is  pure  conjecture. 
There  have  been  many  wild  guesses  at  the  personality  of  the  "man  of 
•in" — that  he  is  Simon  Magus,  Mohammed,  Cromwell,  Napoleon,  the 
Pope,  etc.     These  need  not  detain  us. 

This  epistle  teaches  the  Fatherhood  of  God,  i.  i,  2,  and 
concerning  Christ  that  as  a  Divine  Being  He  is  associated 
with  God  in  conferring  grace,  (i.  i,  2,  12 ;  ii.  16,  17 ;  iii.  1-5, 
18.)  A  severe  tone  marks  the  references  to  the  second 
advent.  Christ  is  to  come  "  rendering  vengeance "  (i.  8) ; 
"  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  slay  *  the  lawless  one '  with  the  breath 
of  His  mouth."  (ii.  8.)  But  deliverance  and  salvation  are  for 
His  people,  who,  however,  must  be  fitted  for  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  The  epistle  contains  no  direct  reference  to  the  death 
of  Christ,  His  resurrection,  or  the  atonement ;  but  its  practical 
purpose  did  not  lead  to  those  subjects.  It  exalts  faith,  love, 
patience,  diligence. 


CHAPTER   VI. 
THE  PAULINE  EPISTLES:   SECOND  GROUP 


I.  The  Church  at  Corinth. 

3.  The    Question    of     u     Lost 

Epistle. 
3.  I  Corinthiani. 


4.  2  Corinthians. 

5.  Galatians. 

6.  Romans. 

7.  Characteristics  of  the  Group. 


An  interval  of  nearly  five  years  separates  the  second  from 
the  first  group  of  St.  Paul's  epistles.  The  four  masterly 
epistles  which  form  this  group  were  written  within  a  twelve- 
month, during  parts  of  the  years  a.d.  57  and  58,  the  epoch 
of  the  apostle's  greatest  literary  productiveness.  The  inter- 
vening time,  while  it  had  been  occupied  with  assiduous 
missionary  labours,  had  seen  the  rise  of  a  determined 
opposition  to  St.  Paul's  claims  and  principles  on  the  part 
of  Judaising  Christians  who  were  sheltering  themselves 
under  the  great  name  of  St.  James,  and  pushing  his  con- 
servative views  to  extremes.  The  effects  of  this  opposition 
on  the  apostle's  mind  are  very  marked.  They  compel  him 
to  justify  his  position,  and  thus  lead  him  to  formulate  his 
ideas  distinctly,  so  that  indirectly  they  stimulate  the  develop- 
ment of  his  thought  and  teaching.  Accordingly  the  epistles 
written  under  these  circumstances  become  doctrinal  and 
argumentative  works,  luminous  in  exposition  and  vigorous 
in  controversy.  But  throughout  this  painful  contest  St. 
Paul  is  eager  to  heal  the  breach,  not  by  conceding  his 
opponents*  position,  but  in  a  practical  way,  by  proving  to 
the  moderate  majority  of  the  Jerusalem  Cliurch  from  which 
they  come  the  essential  brotherhood  of  all  Christians.  In 
pursuit    of    this    aim    he    devotes    much    attention    to    the 

3C1 


362  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

collection  of  contributions  from  his  Greek  churches,  which 
are  to  be  sent  as  tokens  of  brotherly  love  to  relieve  the 
wants  of  the  poor  members  of  the  mother  Church. 

I.  The  Churcli  at  Corinth. 

The  Corinth  of  St.  Paul's  time  was  not  the  famous  city 
of  Greek  history,  which  Cicero  had  styled  "the  light  of 
Greece,"  though  it  was  situated  on  the  same  site,  the 
isthmus  between  the  Ionian  and  the  ^gean  seas.  The 
older  city  had  been  destroyed  by  the  Roman  General 
Mummius  (b.c.  146),  and  for  a  hundred  years  the  site  had 
lain  waste.  Then  a  new  city  was  built  by  Julius  Caesar, 
who  imported  a  number  of  Roman  colonists  and  made  it 
a  Latin  colony,  called  at  first  "Colonia  Julia."  The 
population  consisted  of  descendants  of  these  colonists 
mixed  with  Greeks  who  joined  them.  We  may  notice 
several  Latin  names  among  the  Corinthian  Christians. 
Corinth  was  made  the  capital  of  the  Roman  province  of 
Achaia  (which  comprised  Hellas  and  the  Peloponnesus), 
and  being  well  situated  for  commerce  it  grew  rapidly 
in  wealth  and  luxury.  It  was  variously  governed  at 
different  times.  When  St.  Paul  visited  Corinth  it  was 
under  a  proconsul,  the  well-known  Gallic,  Seneca's  brother 
("Dulcis  Gallic ").  The  place  was  notorious  for  its  vicious 
corruptions.  Dion  Chrysostom  calls  it  a  city,  "the  most 
licentious  of  all  that  are  or  have  been."  {Orat.^  vol.  ii.,  p.  119, 
edit.  Reiske.)  Dean  Farrar  notes  that  it  was  customary  to 
introduce  the  Corinthians  on  the  stage  as  drunken  men. 
The  Acrocorinthus,  a  mountain  spur  nearly  2000  feet  high, 
which  rises  just  above  the  city,  was  consecrated  to  the 
goddess  Aphrodite,  who  was  worshipped  with  the  gross 
Syrian  rites  of  Astarte,  having  in  her  service  a  thousand 
women  devoted  to  an  impure  life.  The  moral  corruptions 
of  the  church  at  such  a  place,  which  appear  in  the  epistles, 
will  be  the  less  astonishing  when  we  remember  these  facts. 
The  church  was  founded  by  St.  Paul  during  his  first 
visit   to   Europe   after   he   had  come    down    from   Philippi, 


THE  QUESTION  OF  A  LOST  EPISTLE    363 

Thessalonica,  and  Beroea  through  Athens  (a.d.  53),  settling 
in  Corinth  for  a  year  and  a  half.  At  first  he  preached 
in  the  synagogue,  and  even  converted  the  ruler  Crispus. 
Then  being  rejected  by  the  Jews,  he  turned  to  the  Gentiles. 
(See  Acts  xviii.)  The  church  was  mixed ;  but  it  consisted 
chiefly  of  Gentiles,  (i  Corinthians  xii.  2.)  There  were  a  few 
wealthy  and  cultivated  persons  in  it,  but  the  majority  were 
drawn  from  the  humbler  classes,  (i  Corinthians  i.  26.)  Still 
the  church  boasted  of  its  intellectuality.  In  their  jealousy 
the  Jews  prosecuted  St.  Paul  before  Gallio,  who,  however, 
dismissed  the  case.  Nevertheless  the  apostle  then  felt  it  wise 
to  remove  from  Corinth,  leaving  Apollos  in  charge  of  his  work. 

2.  The  Question  of  a  Lost  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

There  is  reason  to  think  that  prior  to  our  i  Corinthians 

St.  Paul  had  written   a  short,  sharp   epistle  to   the  church 

at   Corinth,   rebuking  the  evils    of   which  information   had 

reached  him.     This  seems  to  be  referred  to  in  i  Corinthians 

v.  9 :  "I  wrote  unto  you  in  my  epistle  to  have  no  company 

with  fornicators."    (i)    Instances  of  a  similar  phrase  used 

for  the  very  epistle  in   which  it   occurs  have  been  cited; 

but  they  are  not  pertinent,  as  in  every  case  they  are  found 

at  the  end  of  the  document,  while  this  sentence  is  in  the 

first  half  of  the  epistle.     (2)  Then  the  very  phrase  is  used 

by  St.   Paul  for  a  former   epistle  in    2    Corinthians  vii.    8. 

Moreover  the  passage  referred  to  by  this  verse  cannot  be 

found  in  an  earlier  part  of  i   Corinthians,  and  the  sentence 

could  not  point  to  a  later  part  of  the  same  epistle. 

Verses  2,  5,  6,  and  7  in  the  same  chapter  have  been  cited  as  perhaps 
what  the  apostle  was  pointing  to.  But  coming  as  they  do  immediately 
before  this  verse,  could  they  be  described  as  here  :  "  I  wrote  unto  you  in 
my  epistle  ?  "  ^ 

^  The  opinion  that  there  was  a  lost  epistle,  together  with  the  manifest 
references  in  i  Corinthians  to  an  epistle  from  Corinth,  gave  rise  to  two 
forgeries,  one  purporting  to  be  the  Corinthian  letter,  the  other  to  be 
St.  Paul's.  They  were  found  in  the  Armenian  church,  and  inserted  by 
Whiston  in  his  collection  of  Authentic  Records  belonging  to  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments.  A  translation,  parti)?  executed  by  Lord  Byron,  is  in 
Moore's  Life  of  Byron,  It  is  the  opinion  of  critics  that  these  forgeries 
cannot  be  dated  earlier  than  the  eleventh  century. 


364  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

3.  1  Corintliians. 

a.  Genuineness. — The  four  epistles  of  this  second  group 
are  almost  universally  accepted  as  genuine.  Baur,  who 
admitted  no  others,  acknowledged  these.  The  external 
evidence  for  i  Corinthians  is  exceptionally  good.  It  is  ex- 
pressly named  by  Clement  of  Rome  in  his  epistle  to  Corinth 
\c.  A.D.  95),  and  it  appears  to  be  alluded  to  by  several  writers 
early  in  the  second  century. 

Clement  writes  :  *'  Take  up  the  epistle  of  the  blessed  Paul  the  apostle. 
What  did  he  first  write  to  you  in  the  beginning  of  the  gospel  ?  Of  a  truth 
he  sent  a  letter  to  you  {iv^a-TeiXev  v/uv)  by  the  spirit  concerning  himself 
and  also  Cephas  and  Apollos,  because  you  had  even  then  formed  parties" 
(Clement,  i  Cor.  xlvii.  i).  Also  compare  Clement's  epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians (-C.)  with  St.  Paul's  (  =  P.)  further  :— C.  xx.  4  with  P.  xv.  38  ;  C. 
xxiv.  I  with  P.  XV.  20-23  ;  C.  xxiv.  5  with  P.  xv.  26  ;  C.  xxxiv.  8  with 
P.  ii.  9 ;  C.  xxxvii.  4  with  P.  xii.  12  ff.  ;  C.  xlviii.  6  with  P.  x.  24 ;  C. 
xlix.  I  ff.  with  P.  xiii.  Probable  allusions  to  our  epistle  appear  in  Ifermas, 
Sim,  V.  7.  2  (cf.  I  Cor.  iii.  17) ;  Polycarp^  v.  3  {cf,  i  Cor.  vi.  9,  10),  and 
xi.  2  {cf.  I  Cor.  vi.  2) ;  The  Martyrdom  of  Polycarp  ii.  3  {cf.  i  Cor.  ii.  9). 
Justin  Martyr,  Tryph.,  cxi.  {cf.  i  Cor.  v.  7).  After  Clement  of  Rome, 
Irenaeus  is  the  first  to  name  the  epistle  {Adv.  Hcur.^  iii.  11.  9).  It  is  in 
the  Syriac  and  Latin  versions ;  Marcion's  and  the  Muratorian  Canons,  and 
cited  by  Athenagoras^  Theophilus^  CUmefU  A.,  Tertullian^  etc. 

Fitting  well  into  the  history,  revealing  the  heart  and  soul  of 
the  apostle,  intensely  real  throughout,  the  epistle  speaks  for  its 
own  genuineness. 

Nevertheless,  attempts  to  discredit  it  have  recently  been  made  in  two 
quarters,  (i)  By  Loman,  who,  however,  holds  the  gospels  to  be  mythical, 
and  denies  the  historical  existence  of  Jesus  Christ.  (2)  By  Steck,  on  such 
ground  as  that  it  is  inconsistent  with  Acts^  that  it  shows  dependence  on 
Romans  (the  A  '^iypaiTTai  of  I  Cor.  iv.  6,  referring  to  Romans  xii.  3),  and 
also  on  the  gospels  (the  account  of  the  Lord's  Supper  coming  from  Luke) ; 
and  the  witnesses  for  the  resurrection  appearances  in  chapter  xv.  being 
derived  from  more  than  one  gospel.  More  recently  Van  Manen  has  argued 
against  the  genuineness  of  all  the  Pauline  epistles. 

b.  Place  of  Origin  and  Date. — The  subscription  "from 
Philippi"  is  ancient  since  it  is  in  the  Syriac;  but  it  is  not 
correct.  Probably  it  was  suggested  by  xvi.  5 — read  as  "  I  am 
passing  through,"  taken  literally  instead  of  the  obvious  mean- 
ing, "  I  am  about  to  pass  through."  Undoubtedly  the  epistle 
was  written  from  Ephesus  (see  xvi.  8  and  1 9),  and  towards  the 
end  of  the  apostle's  stay  in  that  city,  />.,  a.d.  57  (xvi.  3,  8). 


I    CORINTHIANS  365 

(i)  Apollos  had  come  from  Corinth,  and  joined  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus 
(i.  12;  iii.  4,  22;  iv.  6;  cf.  Acts  xix.  i.)  (2)  After  leaving  Ephesus 
the  apostle  purposed  to  travel  by  Macedonia  to  Achaia  (xvi.  5-7).  This 
route  he  took  (Acts  xx.  i,  2).  (3)  Aquila  and  Priscilla  are  at  Ephesus 
(xvi.  19).  They  had  accompanied  St.  Paul  on  his  going  there  from  Corinth 
(Acts  xviii.  18,  19).  (4)  The  collection  of  money  for  the  poor  at  Jerusalem 
is  now  going  on  in  Achaia  (xvi.  1-3).  It  was  completed  during  St.  Paul's 
next  stay  at  Corinth  (Acts  xx.  3  ;  Romans  xv.  26).  (5)  St.  Paul  hopes  to 
go  by  Corinth  to  Jerusalem  ( i  Corinthians  xvi.  4).  This  hope  he  cherished 
at  the  end  of  his  time  in  Ephesus  (Acts  xix.  21).  This  brings  us  to  the 
year  57.1 

Further,  it  was  before  Pentecost  (xvi.  8),  and  perhaps  near 
Easter  (v.  6-8). 

c.  The  Reasons  for  Writing  the  Epistle, — The  immediate 
occasion  for  sending  this  letter  to  Corinth  was  the  receipt 
of  a  letter  from  the  church  there  (vii.  i),  brought  by  deputies 
(xvi.  17),  and  containing  questions  about  celibacy  (vii.  i), 
the  eating  of  meat  offered  to  idols  (viii.  i) ;  concerning 
the  use  of  spiritual  gifts  (xii.  i),  and  the  collection  for 
Jerusalem  (xvi.  i),  each  of  which  subjects  is  introduced  by 
the  same  formula,  "  Now  concerning  "  (Ilept  Se).  But  news 
had  come  to  the  apostle  from  some  members  of  the  household 
of  Chloe  (i.  11),  and  perhaps  other  visitors  from  Corinth,  that 
there  were  grave  irregularities  in  the  church — party  divisions 
(i.,  ii);  a  case  of  gross  immorality  unchecked  (v.  i);  a  Christian 
going  to  law  with  his  brother  Christian  in  the  pagan  courts 
(vi.  i) ;  indecorous  conduct  on  the  part  of  some  women  in  the 
church  (xi.  5) ;  selfish  feasting,  and  even  drunkenness  at  the 
Agapl  and  the  Lord's  supper  (xi.  20,  21);  denial  of  the  resurrec- 
tion (xv.  12).  St.  Paul  writes  to  correct  these  errors  as  well  as  to 
answer  the  questions  he  has  received.  He  had  sent  Timothy 
to  Corinth  (iv.  17).  But  Timothy  could  not  have  arrived  yet, 
as  he  was  to  travel  round  through  Macedonia  (Acts  xix.  22). 
The  epistle  would  prepare  for  Timothy,  and  the  action  he  was 
to  undertake  personally  on  behalf  of  St.  Paul  (xvi.  10). 

d.  Contents.  —  This  epistle  is  remarkably  orderly  in  its 
arrangement,  proceeding  from  topic  to  topic  seriatim. 

*  See  CONYBEARE  and  HowsON,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Patd^  chapter 
XV. ;  and  Appendix  ii.j  also  new  Bible  Dic.^  art.  *' Chronology." 


366  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

Introduction,  i.  1-9. 

Salutation  (verses  1-3) ;  thanksgiving  (verses  4-9). 

(i)  Faults  of  the  Churchy  i.  lo-vi. 

a.  Faction  (i.  lo-iv.  21).  Party  spirit,  following  various 
leaders.  This  is  rebuked  on  the  ground  that  all  the  leaders 
work  for  a  common  end,  and  also  that  the  real  power  is  not 
man's  at  all,  but  God's. 

/?.  A  case  of  neglected  immorality.  A  man  had  taken  his 
stepmother,  perhaps  married  her.  The  church  is  to  deliver 
such  a  person  to  Satan  for  chastisement.  St.  Paul  reminds 
the  Corinthians  that  he  had  warned  them  in  a  previous  letter 
not  to  associate  with  immoral  persons  (v.). 

7.  Going  to  law  with  a  brother  in  the  pagan  courts  is  re- 
buked. The  church  is  advised  to  constitute  its  own  court  for 
disputes  among  the  brethren  (vi.  i-ii).  A  warning  against 
profligacy  follows  (verses  12-20). 

(2)  Reply  to  the  Letter  of  the  Corinthians^  vii.-xi.  i. 

a.  Marriage  and  celibacy.  It  would  be  good  to  avoid 
marriage.  Still,  those  already  married  are  not  to  separate. 
The  apostle  has  no  commandment  for  the  unmarried,  though 
under  present  circumstances  he  would  prefer  to  see  others  un- 
encumbered as  he  is  (vii.). 

p.  Food  ofifered  to  idols.  Christain  liberty  vindicated; 
still  the  danger  of  idolatry  through  participation  in  idol  feasts 
must  be  avoided  (viii.).  St.  Paul's  own  example  of  not  claim- 
ing one's  rights  (ix.).     The  higher  expediency  (x-xi.  i). 

(3)  Return  to  Faults  of  the  Churchy  xi.  2-34. 

a.  Women  to  behave  more  decorously  in  the  Church 
(xi.  2-16). 

^  Disorderly  conduct  at  the  Lord's  Supper  and  the  Agap> 
rebuked.  An  account  of  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
(xi.  17-34). 

(4)  Reply  to  a  Question  concerning  Spiritual  Gifts.  (xii.-xiv.) 
a.  Unity  and  diversity,  one  body  and  many  members  (xii.). 
^.  Love  the  greatest  grace  (xiii.). 

7.  Prophesying  and  tongues  (xiv.). 

(5)  Vindication  of  the  Resurrection^  (xv.). 


2   CORINTHIANS  367 

a.  The  truth  proved  from  the  resurrection  of  Christ, 
evidence  for  which  is  cited  (xv.  1-34). 

p.  Objections  answered  by  repudiating  the  gross  Jewish 
doctrine,  and  teaching  a  spiritual  resurrection  (xv.  35-58). 

(6)  Practical  Directions  and  Personal  Details^  xvi. 

Directions  concerning  the  collection.  Timothy's  mission. 
Exhortation  and  salutation. 

The  Factions. — The  four  names — Paul,  ApoUos,  Cephas,  Christ — suggest 
four  parties.  Baur  allowed  only  two — the  Pauline,  with  which  are  united 
those  who  claim  ApoUos  j  the  Petrine,  with  which  are  associated  those 
claiming  to  be  of  Christ.  But  this  was  arbitrary  to  square  with  his  theory. 
Pfleiderer  allows  three,  denying  the  existence  of  a  Christ  party,  as  this 
must  have  inclined  to  one  of  the  other  three.  Those  claiming  the  Christ 
name  might  be  neutral,  standing  aloof  from  all  parties ;  and  yet  in  doing 
so  they  would  tend  to  become  a  party  unawares.  Moreover,  2  Corinthians 
X.  7  implies  that  the  people  taking  the  Christ  name  showed  narrowness  in 
refusing  it  to  St.  Paul.  If  they  were  a  party  (i)  they  might  be  those  who 
had  known  our  Lord  on  earth.  But  it  is  not  likely  such  would  be  at 
Corinth.  Besides  the  personal  name  Jesus  would  be  more  suitable  for  a 
reference  to  the  life  of  Christ  on  earth.  (2)  They  might  be  men  who 
claimed  a  direct  mystical  relation  with  the  Christ  in  a  semi-gnostic  sense. 
(3)  The  view  that  they  simply  repudiated  human  leaders,  and  so  took  only 
the  name  of  Christ,  is  more  simple,  and  it  fits  the  case.  Innocent  in  the 
beginning,  such  a  position  would  easily  lead  on  to  the  arrogance  seen  in 
2  Corinthians.  Then  the  Apollos  party  might  represent  the  "wise,"  who 
are  rebuked  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  epistle,  and  the  Peter  party  the 
Judaisers.  But  the  latter  idea  is  not  probable.  It  is  more  likely  that  such 
a  party  would  claim  James.  Therefore  it  would  seem  that  the  divisions 
are  not  formed  on  doctrinal  lines,  but  represent  personal  predilections — 
some  championing  Paul,  some  his  successor  Apollos,  some  turning  to 
Peter  as  the  true  head  of  the  apostolate,  others  repudiating  all  human 
names,  and  claiming  only  to  be  followers  of  Christ.  St.  Paul's  treatment 
of  the  question  favours  this  view.  He  does  not  discuss  doctrinal  differences, 
but  he  shows  the  true  harmony  of  the  work  of  the  various  leaders. 

4.  2  Corinthians. 

a.  Genuineness,  —  This  scarcely  needs  discussion.  The 
almost  universal  acceptance  of  the  four  epistles  of  the 
group  indicates  overwhelming  reasons  for  receiving  them. 
2  Corinthians  was  early  cited,  though  not  so  early  as 
I  Corinthians.  It  is  first  mentioned  in  surviving  Church 
literature  by  Irenseus.  The  character  of  the  writing,  the 
vivid  self-portraiture  of  the  apostle,  and  the  eager,  vital  grasp 
of  facts  of  the  time  stamp  it  as  original 


368  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

2  Corinthians  is  cited  in  Irenaeus,  Adv,  Hcur.^  iii.  7.  i ;  iv.  28.  3  ; 
Athenagoras,  De  Res.^  18;  Clement  A.,  Strom.,  iv.  16;  Tertullian, 
De  Pudic.  13,  and  in  all  these  instances,  except  that  of  Athenagoras 
it  is  indicated  by  name. 

b.  Two  Epistles. — The  view  of  Hilgenfeld  and  Holtzmann 
that  our  2  Corinthians  consists  of  two  epistles,  or  rather 
one  epistle  and  part,  if  not  the  whole,  of  another,  has 
been  growing  in  favour.  The  division  is  put  at  the  end 
of  chapter  ix.,  and  the  chapters  that  follow  are  regarded  as 
constituting  an  epistle,  or  part  of  an  epistle,  written  earlier 
than  the  preceding  chapters  —  a  composition  which  comes 
chronologically  between  i  Corinthians  and  2  Corinthians  i.-ix. 
At  this  point  the  tone  of  the  apostle  suddenly  changes.  In 
the  first  nine  chapters  he  is  grateful  and  hopeful  with  regard 
to  the  whole  church  at  Corinth;  here  he  writes  in  sorrow 
concerning  the  state  of  the  whole  Church,  and  rebukes  it 
sternly.  It  has  been  suggested  as  an  explanation  of  this 
sudden  change  that  while  he  was  writing  2  Corinthians  he 
received  bad  news  from  Corinth.  But  this  would  mean  that 
Titus,  who  had  brought  the  cheering  report  referred  to  earlier 
(vii.  6),  had  been  completely  deceived.  Besides,  would  the 
apostle  then  have  let  the  cheerful  part  of  his  letter  go  un- 
altered, and  have  changed  his  tone  so  completely  for  the 
later  part  without  giving  a  hint  of  his  reason  for  this 
sudden  alteration  ?  Then,  it  has  been  said,  the  nine  chapters 
are  to  the  faithful  section  of  the  church,  and  the  remainder 
to  a  troublesome  faction.  That  cannot  be,  because  in  both 
cases  the  whole  church  is  addressed — in  the  one  with  general 
congratulations,  in  the  other  with  general  complaints. 

Note  in  particular  the  following  points  : — 

(i)  2  Corinthians  ii.  4  refers  to  a  previous  letter  written  in  much 
affliction  and  anguish.  This  would  scarcely  apply  to  i  Corinthians. 
But  it  would  well  characterise  the  latter  part  of  2  Corinthians. 

(2)  2  [Corinthians  vii.  8,  9  also  refers  to  the  severity  of  a  previous 
letter  in  a  way  that  would  apply  to  2  Corinthians  x.-xiii.  better  than 
to  I  Corinthians. 

(3)  In  2  Corinthians  iii.  i  we  read,  "Are  we  beginning  again  to 
commend  ourselves?"  When  had  St.  Paul  commended  himself  to 
Corinth?  Much  more  in  2  Corinthians  than  in  i  Corinthians  (#.^.,  x. 
7-18;  xi.  16-33  J  3cii.  5,  II,  17). 


2  CORINTHIANS  369 

_  (4)  In  2  Corinthians  we  find  the  apostle  shrinking  from  the  idea  of 
visiting  Corinth.  (2  Corinthians  i.  23;  ii.  I,  4.)  No  such  feeling  was 
exhibited  in  i  Corinthians,  in  spite  of  the  complaints  he  then  had  to 
make  {e.g.^  i  Corinthians  xvi.  8,  9).  But  if  he  had  written  2  Corinthians 
x.-xiii.  in  the  interval  with  reference  to  new  troubles  in  the  Corinthian 
church,  the  situation  would  be  altered,  and  the  change  of  feeling  accounted 
for.     This  is  borne  out  by  2  Corinthians  xii.  20,  21  and  xiii.  i,  2. 

For  these  reasons  it  seems  that  we  should  accept  the  view  that 
2  Corinthians  x.-xiii.  is  the  earlier  epistle  referred  to  in  2  Corinthians 
ii.  4 ;  iii.  i  ;  vii.  8,  9,  an  epistle  rebuking  the  Corinthians  for  some 
grievous  evils  of  which  St.  Paul  has  heard. ^ 

c.  Circumstances  and  Reasons  for  Writing.  —  (i)  2  Cor- 
inthians x.-xiii.  After  despatching  i  Corinthians  St.  Paul 
seems  to  have  paid  a  brief  visit  to  Corinth.  We  have  no 
mention  of  it  in  Acts.  But  we  learn  from  2  Corinthians 
xii.  14  that  he  must  have  been  twice  to  Corinth  before 
writing  this,  as  he  is  now  prepared  for  a  third  visit.^  He 
seems  to  mention  the  second  visit  as  an  accomplished  fact 
if  we  may  read  with  R.V.,  "When  I  was  present  the  second 
time  "  (xiii.  2).  It  would  seem  that  he  had  been  badly  received 
on  this  visit.  The  reference  to  his  weak  bodily  presence  and 
unimpressive  oratory  (x.  10)  cannot  apply  to  the  time  when 
he  had  been  living  and  ministering  in  Corinth ;  it  must  allude 
to  a  time  when  he  had  been  coldly  received.  Further,  the 
offence  referred  to  in  2  Corinthians  ii.  5  is  scarcely  the  same 
as  that  of  i  Corinthians  v.,  because  this  implies  a  personal 
insult  to  the  apostle,  while  the  earlier  one  was  a  case  of 
immorality,  having  no  relation  to  himself.  It  would  seem 
that  someone  had  grossly  insulted  him,  and  repudiated  his 
authority.     The  party  arrogating  the  name  of  Christ  now 

1  See  J.  H.  Kennedy,  Tht  Second  and  Third  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians. 
Dresher,  in  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1897,  accepts  the  idea  of  two  epistles 
in  our  2  Corinthians,  but  puts  chapters  x.-xiii.  later  than  chapters  i.-ix. 
This  view  is  liable  to  the  objection  that  Titus  was  deceived  as  to  the  state 
of  Corinth,  and  it  would  not  allow  for  the  aptness  of  the  allusions 
above  referred  to. 

2  The  explanation  that  as  the  apostle  only  writes  of  being  ♦'  prepared  '* 
a  third  time,  he  may  mean  that  he  had  made  preparations  for  his  second 
visit  at  some  previous  time,  and  then  had  postponed  it,  so  that  adding 
these  preparations  to  those  he  is  now  making,  and  the  preparations  for 
his  first  visit,  we  get  three.  But  this  is  most  improbable.  If  the  apostle 
meant  that,  he  would  say  "  the  second  time,''  for  it  would  be  the  second 
preparation  then  in  mind. 

2   B 


370  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

seems  to  be  most  active  in  opposing  the  apostle  (x.  7). 
The  visit  when  this  was  made  apparent  had  been  very 
painful  to  St.  Paul.  That  visit  seems  to  be  in  mind  when 
he  writes  that  he  has  determined  not  to  come  again  in  sorrow 
(ii.  i).  The  first  visit  was  not  in  sorrow.  Since  this  visit 
was  so  unfortunate,  and  the  church  is  still  in  an  un- 
happy condition,  the  apostle  writes  the  epistle  containing 
2  Corinthians  x.-xiii.  to  rebuke  and  expostulate.  He  also 
sends  Titus  to  Corinth. 

(2)  2  Corinthians  i.-ix.  This  was  written  after  Titus  had 
returned,  bringing  most  cheering  news.  The  Corinthians 
had  taken  the  letter  in  good  part,  and  the  rude  opponent 
had  been  severely  handled  by  the  church,  and  was  now 
plunged  in  penitence  (ii.  7).  St.  Paul  is  full  of  joy  and  thank- 
fulness. His  heart  melts  for  the  offender  whom  he  asks  the 
church  to  forgive. 

d.  Place  and  Time  of  Writing.  —  2  Corinthians  x.-xiii. 
gives  no  indication  of  its  locality,  but  if  it  precedes 
2  Corinthians  i.-ix.,  it  must  have  been  written  during 
St  Paul's  residence  at  Ephesus.  2  Corinthians  i.-ix.  is 
written  from  Macedonia  after  the  apostle  had  left  amid 
scenes  of  violence  and  danger  in  the  riot  at  the  theatre 
(Acts  xix.  23-41 ;  XX.  i),  to  which  apparently  he  refers  in 
2  Corinthians  i.  8-10.  Those  scenes  are  still  fresh  in  mind, 
and  therefore  the  intermediate  epistle  which  makes  no  allusion 
to  them  must  have  preceded  them  (and  the  departure  from 
Ephesus).  The  apostle  had  gone  to  Troas  first,  but  not  yet 
seeing  Titus  he  had  passed  on  to  Macedonia,  where  Titus  had 
met  him  (ii.  12,  13).     This  would  be  the  end  of  the  year  57. 

e.  Contents. — Taking  the  document  as  it  stands  in  our 
N.T.,  we  have  two  main  divisions,  corresponding  to  the  idea 
of  two  epistles  just  discussed. 

(i)  i.-ix.,  A  very  affectionate  letter  of  thanksgivitig,  con- 
gratulation^ and  exhortation. 

i.  I,  2,  Salutation. 

3-14,  Thanksgiving  for  God's  mercy  in  affliction,  with  prayer 
that  a  like  comfort  may  come  to  others  in  their  affliction. 


2   CORINTHIANS  371 

15-ii.  2,  The  promised  visit  postponed  for  the  sake  of  the 
Corinthians. 

3-1 1,  The  previous  letter,  the  sorrow  it  caused,  the  penitence 
of  the  offender,  the  forgiveness  of  him. 

12-17,  Good  news  from  Titus.  Thanks  to  God.  Triumph 
in  Christ. 

iii.  1-5,  The  fruits  of  the  apostle's  ministry  are  his  com- 
mendation ;  yet  they  are  God's  work. 

6-18,  The  superior  glory  of  this  ministry  of  the  gospel 
of  life  above  that  of  the  old  Mosaic  dispensation. 

iv.,  The  joys  and  privileges  of  this  ministry,  in  spite  of 
trouble  and  peril;  present  light  affliction  working  for  eternal 
glory  through  the  vision  of  the  Unseen. 

V.  I- 10,  Hopes  beyond  death  inspiring  present  courage. 

1 1- 1 9,  The  constraining  love  of  Christ  and  the  new  creation 
in  Him. 

20-vi.  13,  The  persuasive  ministry  in  sorrow  and  sympathy. 

14-vii.  I,  Warning  against  being  unequally  yoked  with 
unbelievers. 

vii.  2-16,  Reflections  on  the  previous  letter,  the  errand 
of  Titus,  and  the  godly  sorrow  that  followed. 

viii.  1-15,  Concerning  the  collection  for  the  poor  at 
Jerusalem.     The  Macedonians  most  generous  in  this. 

16-24,  In  praise  of  Titus. 

ix.,  Exhortations  to  generosity  in  the  collection,  with  re- 
minders of  God's  bounty. 

(2)  x.-xiii.,  A  most  sorrowful  and  vehement  expostulatmi, 

X.,  A  warning  to  those  who  despise  the  apostle's  authority. 

xi.  1-7,  This  authority  reaffirmed. 

8-33,  A  recital  of  the  apostle's  rights  and  arduous  ex- 
periences in  his  work. 

xii.  I -10,  A  heavenly  vision  and  a  thorn  in  the  flesh. 

11-13,  The  signs  of  an  apostle. 

14-21,  How  Paul  and  Titus  had  treated  the  Corinthiansw 

xiii.,  Further  warnings  and  exhortations ;  greetings ;  and  a 
final  benediction. 


372  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

5.  Galatians. 

a.  The  Galatian  Churches. — The  word  •*  Galatia  "  is  used  in 
two  applications: — (i)  ethnographically,  for  the  district  in  the 
extreme  north  of  Asia  Minor,  which  was  inhabited  by  immigrant 
Celts  (Galatian  =  Gaul)  from  the  west,  and  (2)  politically  for 
the  Roman  province,  which  included  with  this  district  a  much 
larger  area — the  greater  part  of  Pisidia,  Isauria,  Lycaonia,  and 
a  portion  of  Phrygia.  In  this  province  of  Galatia  were  situated 
the  towns  visited  by  St.  Paul  during  his  first  journey  through 
Asia  Minor — Antioch,  Iconium,  Derbe,  and  Lystra.  There 
is  good  reason  to  believe  that  the  churches  addressed  in 
Galatians  are  those  which  the  apostle  had  planted  in  those 
towns. 

Bishop  Lightfoot  argued  for  North  Galatia.^  But  since  the  publi- 
cation of  his  commentary,  the  argument  for  the  south  Galatian  theory 
— that  which,  taking  the  name  to  apply  to  the  whole  province,  allows  of 
the  churches  which  we  know  St.  Paul  to  have  planted  in  the  south  of  it  to 
be  those  addressed  in  the  epistle — has  been  powerfully  strengthened  by 
Professor  Ramsay's  researches  in  Asia  Minor,  and  arguments  based  on 
them.'^ 

The  following  considerations  make  for  this  position  :— (i)  St.  Paul 
invariably  writes  of  the  regions  he  visits  under  the  names  of  the  Roman 
provinces  in  which  they  are  situated — Asia,  Macedonia,  Achaia.  In  this 
he  differs  from  St.  Luke,  who  uses  the  popular  local  names.  Thus  we 
may  account  for  the  fact  that  in  Acts  the  churches  of  the  first  missionary 
journey  are  not  said  to  be  Galatian,  but  described  as  in  Pisidia  (Acts  xiii. 
14)  and  Pamphylia  (xiv.  24).  (2)  It  would  be  singular  that  Acts  should 
give  no  details  of  the  founding  of  churches  so  intimately  connected  with 
St.  Paul  as  Galatians  shows  the  churches  there  addressed  to  be  ;  and  still 
more  remarkable  that  in  none  of  his  epistles  the  apostle  should  refer  to 
churches  which  Acts  connects  so  closely  with  him  as  those  at  Antioch, 
Iconium,  Derbe,  and  Lystra.  If  these  are  the  Galatian  churches,  both 
difficulties  disappear.  We  have  a  full  account  of  the  founding  of  the 
Galatian  churches  in  Acts,  and  St.  Paul  frequently  refers  to  the  churches 
of  his  first  missionary  journey  through  Asia  Minor.  (3)  It  is  highly  im- 
probable that  St.  Paul  would  have  taken  the  long  journey  over  a  wild, 
almost  impassable  mountain  region  to  the  Celtic  Galatians.  Professor 
Ramsay's  travels  on  the  spot  have  brought  out  this  difficulty.  St.  Paul 
usually  travelled  on  Roman  roads,  on  the  great  highways  between  the 
centres  of  population.     (4)  In  i  Peter  i.  i  Galatia  appears  in  a  list  of 

^  Commentary  on  Galatians^  pp.  1-35. 

2  Ramsay,  The  Church  in  the  Ro7nan  E7npire^  chapters  v.,  vi.  ;  St. 
Paul,  etc.,  chapters  v.,  vi.,  viii.  This  view,  which  has  been  maintained  by 
Renan,  Weizsacker,  Hausrath,  Schenkel,  Pfleiderer,  etc.,  is  accepted  and 
well  defended  in  the  most  recent  N.T.  Introduction,  Zahn's  Einkitung, 
Vol.  I.,  pp.  123-129  [1897]. 


GALATIANS  373 

Roman  provinces,  and  therefore  must  be  understood  as  a  province.  Among 
minor  considerations  note  that  Barnabas  is  referred  to  more  than  once  in 
Galatians  (ii.  i  ;  ii.  13).  Now  Barnabas  was  with  St.  Paul  in  the  mission 
to  the  southern  churches  (Acts  xiii.  2,  43,  46,  50 ;  xiv.  12,  14,  20),  and 
was  therefore  well  known  among  them.  But  he  was  not  with  the  apostle 
during  the  second  journey,  when,  according  to  the  North  Galatian  theory, 
the  Galatian  churches  would  have  been  founded  (Acts  xv.  36-40  ;  xvi.  6). 
Then  Professor  Ramsay,  supposing  that  the  "thorn  [stake]  in  the  flesh" 
(2  Corinthians  xii.  7)  represents  an  illness — probably  malarial  fever — con- 
tracted at  Perga,  in  the  weakness  consequent  on  which  St.  Paul  visited  the 
towns  beyond  the  Taurus  Mountains,  suggests  that  it  is  referred  to  in 
Galatians  iv.  13,  14.  It  has  been  objected  that  secular  writers  do  not 
refer  to  these  towns  as  Galatian.  But  then  St.  Paul's  known  constant 
habit  of  writing  of  Roman  provinces  must  be  set  off  against  that.  Nor 
was  it  only  an  idiosyncrasy.  He  delighted  to  think  of  the  large  possibilities 
of  the  gospel  planted  in  local  centres,  and  in  this  case  no  one  local  name 
would  cover  all  the  churches  addressed.  Moreover,  there  were  Phrygians 
among  them,  and  it  was  not  considered  complimentary  to  address  anybody 
as  a  Phrygian,  that  name  being  popularly  used  for  a  low  character. 

b.    Genuineness  of  the  Epistle,  —  Being  one   of  the  four 

almost  unquestioned^   writings   of  St.   Paul,   this  does  not 

require  much   time   for   the   examination  of  its  credentials. 

Possibly  alluded  to  by  several  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  and 

apparently  by  Justin  Martyr  and  Athenagoras  in  the  middle 

of   the  second  century,  it  is  expressly  named  by  Irenaeus, 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  Tertullian,  etc.     But  more  convincing 

than  any  external  testimony  is  the  witness  of  the  epistle  to  its 

own  genuineness.    Its  vehemence,  its  abruptness,  its  very  slips 

of  grammar  show  how  it  comes  hot  from  the  heart  of  the 

apostle.     It  exactly  suits  the  circumstances  of  his  time,  and 

could  not  fit  in  with  Gnostic,  Ebionite,  or  Catholic  reaction 

ideas  of  a  later  period.    The  very  difficulty  of  reconciling  some 

of  its  narrative  with  Acts  speaks  for  its  honesty.     A  Pauline 

imitator  knowing   Acts  would   not  have  manufactured  this 

hindrance  to  the  acceptance  of  his  work. 

For  external  evidence  cf.  Clement  R.,  i  Epis.,  xlix.  6  with  Gal.  i.  4  ; 
Barnabas  xix.  8  with  Gal.  vi.  6;  Polycarp,  Phil.^  iii.  2  with  Gal.  iv.  26; 
v.  I  with  Gal.  vi.  7  ;  vi.  3  with  Gal.  iv.  18  ;  ix.  2  with  Gal.  ii.  2 ;  Justin 
Martyr,  Tryph.y  95  with  Gal.  iii.  10  ;  Epis.  to  Diognetus,  v.  5  with  Gal. 
iv.  10 ;  Athenagoras,  Legatio,  xvi.  with  Gal.  iv.  9,  as  possible  allusions. 
Irenaeus  cites  and  names  the  epistle  in  Adv.  ffaer.,  iii.  7.  2  ;  iii.  16.  3  ; 
v.  21,  I ;  also  Clement  A.,  Strom. ^  iii.  16;  Tertullian,  ^^z;.  Marc.^  v.  2.  i; 
De  PrtEScrip.f  vi. 

*  Except  in  the  Dutch  school,  see  page  364. 


374  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

c.  Occasioft. — The  occasion  for  the  writing  of  this  epistle 
is  very  evident  in  its  contents.  St.  Paul  is  amazed  and 
distressed  with  the  alarming  news  that  his  Galatian  converts 
have  been  tampered  with,  and  perverted  from  the  gospel  he 
has  taught  them,  by  some  Jewish  Christians  who  have  come  to 
persuade  them  to  accept  circumcision,  and  submit  to  the  law 
for  the  perfecting  of  their  Christianity.  These  intruders  have 
been  so  successful  that  the  apostle  thinks  the  Galatians  must 
be  bewitched.  One  consequence  of  this  perversion  is  that 
the  authority  of  St.  Paul  and  his  influence  have  been  under- 
mined. The  apostle  writes  in  a  tone  of  angry,  though  pain- 
ful expostulation.  The  Galatians  have  seen  Christ  crucified 
clearly  set  before  them ;  who  then  has  bewitched  them  ? 
They  had  been  most  affectionate  to  the  apostle  himself,  ready 
to  pluck  out  their  eyes  for  him ;  how  then  are  they  now 
turned  against  him?  Thus  St.  Paul  has  a  twofold  aim  in 
writing  : — ( i )  The  vindication  of  his  own  apostlcship.  This  he 
does  by  appealing  to  his  inward  call  direct  from  Christ  (i.  i, 
12,  15,  16),  and  reciting  the  circumstances  of  his  early 
Christian  career,  which  show  that  he  could  not  have  received 
his  gospel  from  the  other  apostles.  But  the  establishment  of 
his  claim  is  only  to  lead  to  a  larger  question.  (2)  The  dear 
demonstration  of  his  gospel,  St.  Paul  will  have  his  readers  see 
the  fatal  mistake  of  going  back  to  the  law,  since  faith  is  the 
sole  means  of  justification  before  God.  This  position  he 
argues  to  prove. 

d.  Date  and  Place  of  Writing. — These  points  must  be 
determined  to  some  extent  by  the  decision  as  to  the  locality 
of  the  Galatian  churches.  With  the  North  Galatian  theory 
we  cannot  date  the  epistle  earlier  than  some  time  after  the 
conclusion  of  St.  Paul's  stay  at  Corinth.  In  Galatians  iv.  13 
he  writes  of  when  he  preached  to  the  Galatians  "the  first 
time."  This  implies  that  there  had  been  a  second  visit.  On 
the  North  Galatian  theory  these  two  visits  would  seem  to  be 
those  of  Acts  xvi.  6  and  xviii.  23.  This  brings  us  to  a.d.  54 
as  the  earliest  possible  date.  But  on  the  South  Galatian 
theory  the  first  visit  was  that  of  Acts  xiii.,  xiv.,  and  the  second 


GALATIANS  375 

that  of  Acts  xvi.  1-5.  This  would  allow  of  as  early  a  date  as 
A.D.  51.  Moreover,  the  phrase,  "I  marvel  that  ye  are  so 
quickly  removing  from  him  that  called  you  "  (Galatians  i.  6), 
would  seem  to  show  that  the  epistle  was  not  written  long  after 
the  conversion  of  the  Galatians.  Still  this  is  an  indefinite 
expression.  While  it  would  incline  us  to  give  an  early  date  to 
the  epistle,  making  it  the  first  written  of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  there 
are  strong  reasons  for  placing  it  later.  In  style  and  thought  it 
is  closely  allied  to  the  epistles  of  the  second  group.  To  place 
it  before  i  and  2  Thessalonians  is  to  dislocate  all  indications 
of  development  in  the  apostle's  teaching.  The  four  epistles  of 
the  second  group  are  all  concerned  with  the  great  controversy 
concerning  the  relation  of  Christianity  to  Judaism,  and  they 
all  reach  the  high-water  mark  of  the  apostle's  vigorous  writing. 
Thoughts  and  phrases  repeat  themselves  in  this  group  as  no- 
where else.  It  is  more  difficult  to  determine  the  place  of  the 
epistle  in  the  group.  The  indications  that  it  was  written  not 
too  long  after  the  founding  of  the  Galatian  churches  would 
urge  us  to  put  it  first,  and  therefore  at  Ephesus  even  before 
the  writing  of  i  Corinthians — say  early  in  a.d.  57.  On  the 
other  hand  the  great  resemblance  of  its  chief  ideas  and  of 
many  of  its  verbal  expressions  to  Romans  should  perhaps 
incline  us  to  follow  Lightfoot,  and  place  it  immediately  before 
that  epistle,  in  which  case  we  have  to  take  it  as  written  from 
Corinth  on  the  occasion  of  the  apostle's  second  visit  to  that 
city,  probably  early  in  a.d.  58. 

e.  Contents. — The  epistle  falls  into  two  parts:  (i)  Bio- 
graphical; (2)  doctrinal. 

(i)  Biographical^  i.,  ii. 

i.  1-5,  Salutation,  without  a  word  of  the  usual  congratula- 
tions. 

6-10,  Astonishment  at  the  quick  perversion  of  the 
Galatians. 

11-17,  Account  of  the  apostle's  call — from  the  inside. 
His  early  Judaism,  persecuting  the  Church;  yet  his  Divine 
destiny  from  his  birth;  the  revelation  of  God's  Son  in  him; 
his  not  conferring  with  any  man ;  his  retirement  to  Arabia. 


376  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

18-24,  St.  Paul's  first  visit  to  Jerusalem  after  his  conversion, 
staying  fifteen  days  with  Cephas,  seeing  James,  but  no  other 
apostle.     Preaching  tour  in  Syria  and  Cilicia 

ii.  i-io,  Visit  to  Jerusalem  fourteen  years  later  with 
Barnabas,  attended  by  Titus.  Going  up  "by  revelation." 
A  private  account  of  the  mission  to  the  Gentiles  given  to 
"  them  who  were  of  repute."  Attempts  of  "  false  brethren  " 
to  get  Titus  circumcised  successfully  resisted.  James,  Cephas, 
and  John  give  Paul  and  Barnabas  the  right  hands  of  fellow- 
ship, agreeing  that  they  should  go  to  the  Gentiles,  but 
commissioning  them  to  remember  the  poor  brethren  in 
Jerusalem  while  Peter  has  the  charge  of  work  among  the 
Jews. 

1 1-2 1,  Cephas  at  Antioch  withstood  by  Paul  for  weakly 

yielding  to  some  who  had  come  from  James,  and  ceasing 

to  eat  with  the  Gentiles,  even  carrying  Barnabas  with  him. 

It  is  difficult  to  bring  this  narrative  into  agreement  with  Acts.  The 
epistle  only  names  two  visits  to  Jerusalem.  The  first  (Galatians  i.  18,  19) 
can  be  identified  with  that  of  Acts  ix.  26-30  without  much  difficulty, 
though  in  Acts  he  preaches  "boldly"  at  Jerusalem  and  disputes  with 
the  Hellenists,  while  in  Galatians  his  visit,  lasting  only  fifteen  days, 
seems  to  have  been  wholly  private,  so  that  he  was  unknown  by  face 
to  the  churches  of  Judcea.  There  is  no  absolute  contradiction  here. 
Of  course  St.  Paul's  own  narrative  must  be  accepted  as  the  most 
authentic  account,  if  we  cannot  quite  reconcile  the  two.  But  what 
of  the  second-named  visit?  (Galatians  ii.  i-io.)  This  has  generally 
been  identified  with  that  of  Acts  xv.  1-29.  But  while  in  Acts  Paul 
goes  with  Barnabas  as  a  deputation  from  Antioch  to  consult  the  Church 
at  Jerusalem,  and  a  meeting  of  the  Church  is  held,  from  which  a  letter 
is  sent  back  to  Antioch ;  in  Galatians  he  does  not  refer  to  the 
"Jerusalem  council,"  or  the  «* decree"  sent  from  it,  but  says  he  laid 
his  gospel  "privately  before  them  who  were  of  repute,"  and  obtained 
a  confirmation  of  his  mission  from  the  three  leaders,  James,  Cephas, 
and  John.  Moreover  in  Acts  we  read  of  an  intermediate  visit,  when 
'  *  Barnabas  and  Saul "  were  sent  up  from  Antioch  with  relief  for  the 
Jerusalem  Christians  in  a  time  of  famine.  (Acts  xi.  27-30.)  Yet  the 
narrative  in  Galatians  would  suggest  that  St.  Paul  is  reciting  all  his 
visits  to  Jerusalem.^  Professor  Ramsay  proposes  to  identify  the  second- 
named  visit  in  Galatians  with  the  second  in  Acts.^  But  St.  Paul  makes 
no  reference  to  the  famine  or  the  deputation  with  contributions.  More- 
over, different  as  are  the  accounts  in  Galatians  ii.   l-io  and  Acts  xv., 

*  This  apparent  discrepancy  has  been  used  to  discredit  the  historicity 
of  Acts.  By  the  recent  Dutch  it  is  turned  the  other  way,  to  discredit 
Galatians. 

^  SL  Paid,  etc.,  chapter  iii. 


GALATIANS  377 

it  may  be  noted:  (i)  Describing  the  case  from  his  own  standpoint, 
the  apostle  might  tell  of  a  revelation  which  encouraged  him  to  go,  and 
which  would  not  be  inconsistent  with  the  Antioch  Church's  action. 
(2)  In  Galatians  he  may  be  referring  to  his  own  private  movements  at 
Jerusalem  previous  to  the  more  public  meeting  of  the  Church.  (3)  The 
visit  during  the  famine  may  not  have  been  mentioned  in  Galatians, 
because  St.  Paul  did  not  then  see  the  apostles.  Acts  expressly  says 
the  gifts  were  given  to  the  elders  (Acts  xi.  30),  and  does  not  mention 
the  apostles  in  this  connection,  suggesting  that  they  were  absent,  perhaps 
owing  to  Herod's  persecution.  But  in  Galatians  St.  Paul  is  simply  concerned 
with  proving  that  he  had  not  received  his  gospel  from  the  apostles.  A 
further  difficulty  has  been  felt  with  the  narrative  of  St.  Peter's  weakness 
in  Galatians  which,  it  is  said,  could  not  have  occurred  after  the  council. 
But  (i)  How  do  we  know  that  St.  Peter  might  not  have  gone  back  under 
pressure  from  the  position  he  held  at  Jerusalem?  St.  Paul's  narrative 
implies  that  St.  Peter's  first  action  and  conviction  went  with  the  liberal 
view.  And  the  Jerusalem  decision  did  not  actually  allow  Jews  to  eat 
with  Gentiles.  But  perhaps  St.  Paul  does  not  give  this  incident  in  its 
chronological  order  with  relation  to  what  he  narrates  before.  He  does 
not  introduce  it  with  any  note  of  time.  It  may  have  occurred  between 
the  two  visits  to  Jerusalem  which  he  describes.^ 

(2)  Doctrinal^  iii.-vi. 

iii.  1-5,  Expostulation  with  the  Galatians  for  being 
"bewitched"  into  forsaking  the  gospel  of  Christ  crucified 
and  the  power  of  faith. 

6-14,  Abraham  justified  by  faith.  In  O.T.  the  righteous 
live  by  faith. 

15-22,  The  covenant  with  Abraham  older  than  the  law, 
which  only  came  in  as  an  afterthought  because  of  trans- 
gressions. 

23-29,  The  law  as  a  tutor  to  bring  us  to  Christ,  in  whom 
human  distinctions  of  race,  etc.  are  at  an  end. 

iv.  1-7,  The  slave  and  the  son. 

8-1 1,  Return  to  beggarly  elements. 

12-20,  Pleading  in  recollection  of  the  old  friendship. 

2 1 -v.  I,  The  allegory  of  Hagar. 

2-12,  The  uselessness  of  circumcision. 

13-15,  Freedom  to  be  exercised  in  love. 

16-26,  The  works  of  the  flesh  and  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit. 

vi.  1-5,  Bearing  one  another's  burdens. 

6-10,  The  duty  of  supporting  the  teachers.     The  harvest. 

^  See  new  Bible  Dictionary,  art.  "Chronology,"  by  C.  H.  Turner, 
vol.  i.,  p.  424. 


378  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

11-18,  An  addition  in  the  apostle's  own  handwriting.  Not 
circumcision,  but  a  new  creature.  St.  Paul  branded  with  the 
marks  of  Jesus.     Benediction. 

6.  Romans. 

a.  The  Roman  Church. — The  origin  of  the  Church  at 
Rome  is  lost  in  obscurity.  It  is  clear  from  the  course  of 
the  history  in  Acts,i  and  also  from  this  epistle  which  is 
addressed  to  Roman  Christians  as  people  whom  the  apostle 
had  not  yet  seen  (Romans  i.  8-1 1;  vi.  17;  xv.  28,  29,  32), 
that  the  church  was  not  planted  by  St.  Paul.  It  is  almost 
equally  certain  that  it  was  not  founded  by  St.  Peter.  Not 
only  is  there  no  reference  in  Acts  or  anywhere  else  in  the 
N.T.  earlier  than  i  Peter  to  that  apostle  going  to  Rome,^ 
but  it  is  also  clear  that  he  could  not  have  been  there 
when  St.  Paul  wrote  Romans,  or  the  fact  would  be  men- 
tioned. Besides,  St.  Paul  would  not  have  expressed  his 
eagerness  to  visit  the  church  and  impart  some  spiritual 
gift  (Romans  i.  11),  as  this  would  have  been  contrary  to 
his  rule  of  not  building  on  another  man's  foundation. 
(Romans  xv.  20.)  Possibly  the  church  was  founded  by 
some  of  the  Pentecost  converts.  (Acts  ii.   10.) 

The  earliest  extant  assertion  that  St.  Peter  was  a  founder  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  was  made  by  Dionysius  of  Corinth  {c.  a.d.  170), 
but  he  associates  St.  Paul  in  the  work,  which  we  know  to  be  incorrect. 
Evidently  it  is  a  loose  statement,  though  it  may  be  taken  as  ancient 
testimony  to  the  presence  and  work  of  the  two  apostles  in  the  city  at 
some  time.* 

The  church  at  Rome  seems  to  have  consisted  of  Jews 
and  Greeks.  Chapters  ii.,  iii.,  and  iv.  continually  address 
Jews.  This  is  very  marked  at  ii.  17  ff.  And  yet  other 
passages  show  that  the  majority  are  Gentiles,  (i.  5,  6,  13; 
XV.    15,    16.)      St.    Paul    does    not    address    these    people 

^  See  Acts  xix.  21;  xxiii.  11;  and  especially  Acts  xxviii.  14,  15, 
which  describes  Roman  Christians  as  welcoming  St.  Paul  on  his  first 
visit  to  the  city. 

"^  And  that  only  on  the  supposition  that  the  Babylon  of  i  Peter  v.  13  is 
Rome. 

^  TV  dri  Uirpov  Kal  Tla^Xov  (pxrrdav  yevrjdeiaay  'Pw/ta/w*'  re  icai 
KopivOio)p  (Twe/cepdo-are.— EuSEBius,  H.E.,  ii.  25. 


ROMANS  379 

collectively  under  the  title  of  the  "church,"  as  he  had 
addressed  the  readers  of  all  his  previous  letters,^  but  as 
"saints,"  and  he  names  no  church  officers — bishops,  elders, 
or  deacons.  Yet  it  is  evident  that  the  Christians  constitute 
an  assembly,  meeting  and  working  together  (xiv.  i),  with  a 
real  fellowship  (xv.  i,  2),  various  forms  of  service  falling  to 
the  lot  of  various  members  according  to  their  gifts  (xii.  6-8). 
A  similar  condition  was  found  at  Corinth. 

b.  Genuineness  of  the  Epistle. — This  is  the  fourth  of  the 
virtually  unquestioned  epistles.^  It  was  evidently  known  to 
Clement  R.  {c,  a.d.  95),  and  it  is  often  referred  to  by  second 
century  writers,  Irenseus,  as  usual,  being  the  first  to  quote  it 
by  name.  Its  extraordinary  vigour  and  freshness  of  thought 
and  the  perfectly  sublime  reach  of  its  argument  stamp  this  as 
an  inspired  work  of  the  highest  order,  and  authenticate  its 
claim  to  apostolic  authorship.  The  personality  of  the  apostle 
is  evident  throughout.     It  is  thoroughly  characteristic. 

For  external  evidence  compare  i  Clement,  xxxv.  5  with  Rom.  i.  29-32 ; 
Polycarp,  Phil.,  vi.  2  with  Rom.  xiv.  10;  Theophilus,  Ad  Autol.,  i.  14 
with  Rom.  ii.  6-9;  Ignatius,  Eph.,  18  with  Rom.  i.  3,  4 ;  and  Smyrn.  i 
with  Rom.  i.  3,  4.  The  epistle  of  the  churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne 
(Euseb.,  H.E.yW.  i.  6)  with  Rom.  viii.  18 ;  Justin  Martyr,  Trypho.,  xxiii. 
with  Rom.  iv.  3,  10,  11.  Irenaeus  quotes  "the  presbyters"  as  saying  "all 
men  are  wanting  in  the  glory  of  God,  but  they  are  not  justified  by  them- 
selves" {Adv.  Haer,,  iv.  27.  2),  evidently  alluding  to  Rom.  iii.  23;  and 
these  are  men  of  an  earlier  generation.  The  first  occasion  when  the 
epistle  is  quoted  by  name  is  in  Irenceus,  Adv.  Haer.,  iii.  16.  3.  Irenseus 
quotes  it  on  several  other  occasions.  So  do  Clement  A.,  TertuUian,  etc. 
It  is  in  the  Marcionite  canon,  the  Muratorian  Fragment ^  the  early 
versions. 

c.  Integrity. — Doubts  have  been  felt  as  to  the  right  of  the 
last  two  chapters  (xv.,  xvi.)  to  be  included  in  the  epistle, 
a  few  extreme  critics  rejecting  them  as  not  genuine,  but 
many  more  holding  that  though  written  by  St.  Paul,  they 
do  not  belong  to  this  epistle,  but  are  fragments  of  other 
epistles.  The  case  is  strongest  in  regard  to  chapter  xvi. 
There  are  good  reasons  for  detaching  this  chapter  and  taking 

1  I  Thess.  i.  I ;  2  Thess.  i.  i  ;  i  Cor.  i.  2 ;  2  Cor.  i.  i ;  Gal.  i.  2. 
*  Though,  in  common  with  the  other  three,  questioned  by  Steck,  etc., 
Iind  the  Dutch  school.     See  page  364. 


38o  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

it  as  in  all  probability  a  fragment  of  an  epistle  to  Ephesus, 
commending  Phoebe  to  that  church,  (i)  This  chapter  abounds 
in  greetings  and  the  most  varied  personal  characterising  of 
the  men  and  women  saluted.  It  is  improbable  that  St.  Paul 
knew  so  many  people  at  Rome.  We  are  told  that  many  Jews 
visited  the  metropolis  for  purposes  of  trade,  etc.  True ;  but 
what  a  cluster  of  intimate  friends  we  have  here !  More  than 
are  saluted  in  any  other  epistle.  Yet  the  earlier  chapters  are 
addressed  as  to  strangers.  On  the  other  hand  St.  Paul  knew 
many  in  Ephesus,  where  he  had  laboured  for  two  years. 
(Acts  xix.   lo.) 

(2)  The  chief  reason  for  selecting  Ephesus  among  the 
places  well  known  to  the  apostle  comes  from  the  mention 
of  Prisca  and  Aquila  (xvi.  3),  for  we  know  they  were  at 
Ephesus  a  short  time  before  (i  Corinthians  xvi.  19;  Acts  xviii. 
18,  26);  and  when  they  are  next  met  with  they  are  also  at 
Ephesus.  (2  Timothy  iv.  19.)  The  probable  inference  is  that 
they  were  to  be  found  there  in  the  interval  Then  Epsenetus 
was  also  of  Ephesus  or  its  neighbourhood,  as  he  is  called 
"the  firstfruits  of  Asia."  (Romans  xvi.  5.) 

(3)  The  tone  of  xvi.  1 7-20  does  not  agree  with  that  of  the 
earlier  part  of  the  epistle.  It  refers  to  known  divisions,  of 
which  the  body  of  the  epistle  gives  no  hint;  its  appeal  to 
"the  teaching  which  ye  learnt"  implies  that  St.  Paul  knew 
what  that  teaching  had  been ;  and  the  strong  words  used  in 
characterising  the  disturbers,  followed  by  the  affectionate 
paternal  appeal  to  his  readers  to  be  wise  and  true,  is  quite 
of  another  tone  from  the  courteous  address  of  Romans  as 
to  people  whom  the  apostle  did  not  yet  know  personally. 

Further,  in  regard  to  the  question  of  integrity,  the  following  points 
should  be  noted  : — 

(1)  Chapters  xv.  and  xvi.  were  not  in  Marcion's  Romans.  But  then 
Marcion  was  not  solely  influenced  by  questions  of  literary  genuineness  in 
limiting  his  canon.  The  acceptance  of  the  O.T.  in  xv.  4  was  contrary  to 
his  doctrine. 

(2)  The  epistle  seems  to  have  three  endings — at  xv.  33  ;  xvi.  20 ;  and 
xvi.  27. 

(3)  The  final  doxology  appears  in  various  places  in  different  copies  of 
the  epistle. 


ROMANS  381 

(o)  At  the  end  of  xvi.  (The  MSS.  N  BCDE;  Pesh.,  Vulg.,  Memph., 

Aeth.  versions ;  some  copies  known  to  Origen).         (j8)  At  the  end 

of  xiv.  (L ;  most  cursives ;  Greek  lectionaries ;  the  later  Syriac, 

Gothic,    Armen.,    Slav,   versions;    copies  mentioned  by  Origen, 

Chrysostom,  Cyril,  Theodoret,  etc.).        (7)  In  both  places  (A  and 

some  cursives).         (5)  Omitted  altogether  by  F.G.  and  some  copies 

alluded  to  by  Jerome.     The  preponderating  evidence  is  for  (a),  i.e.^ 

to  read  the  doxology  at  the  end  of  the  epistle.     Still  the  variations 

are  significant. 

These  data  have  given  rise  to  considerable  divergence  of  opinion. 

Semler,  who  first  raised  doubts  as  to  the  integrity  of  the  epistle,  took  xvi. 

to  contain  a  list  of  teachers  who  were  to  receive  copies  of  the  epistle  on 

the  way  to  Rome,  and  xv.  special  directions  for  those  teachers.     Paulus 

regarded  xv.  as  an  appendix  for  the  enlightened,  and  xvi.  as  an  added 

leaflet  of  greetings. 

Baur  held  that  neither  of  the  chapters  was  written  by  St.  Paul,  main- 
taining that  they  were  added  to  reconcile  the  Judaisers  and  the  Paulinists. 
Like  Marcion,  he  could  not  reconcile  xv.  4  with  his  idea  of  St.  Paul's 
position  ;  and  he  regarded  xvi.  as  deliberately  composed  to  make  it  appear 
that  the  apostle  had  many  friends  at  Rome.  Dr.  Samuel  Davidson,  while 
retaining  xv.,  rejected  xvi.  as  spurious.  But  for  the  most  part,  the  Pauline 
authorship  of  both  chapters  is  now  admitted.  Renan  divides  the  epistle 
thus: — (i)  i.-xi.,  xv.,  for  Rome;  (2)  i.-xiv.,  xvi.  1-20,  a  copy  for  Ephesus; 
(3)  i.-xiv.,  xvi.  21-24,  a  copy  for  Thessalonica — the  names  in  the  latter 
section  appearing  to  him  to  point  in  that  direction  ;  (4)  i.-xiv.,  xvi.  25-27, 
a  copy  for  some  unknown  church,  the  apostle  himself  having  issued  different 
editions  of  the  epistle.  Spitta  considers  that  there  are  two  epistles  laid  to- 
gether, the  second  consisting  of  i.  7-12 ;  xii.-xv.  7  ;  and  xvi.  1-20,  which 
we  have  combined  with  the  original  epistle  to  the  Romans.  Bishop  Light- 
foot  argued  that  all  but  the  last  four  verses  went  to  Rome,  and  that 
subsequently  the  apostle  issued  another  edition,  in  which  he  substituted 
these  verses  for  chapters  xv.,  xvi.  This  theory  rests  partly  on  the  fact  that 
the  western  MS.  G.  omits  ^v'Pci/iT;  in  two  places  (i.  7  and  15).  A  double 
omission  could  not  be  accidental,  and  it  is  supported  by  the  cursive  47. 
The  theory  also  attempts  to  account  for  some  of  the  other  peculiarities  of 
the  last  two  chapters.  Dr.  Hort  disputed  this  position,  maintaining  that 
the  doxology  summed  up  the  whole  argument  of  the  epistle,  and  attribut- 
ing the  MS.  variations  partly  to  the  influence  of  Marcion  on  the  text,  and 
partly  to  the  way  the  epistle  was  divided  in  lectionaries.^ 

d.  Occasion  of  Writing.  —  In  part  the  epistle  seems  to 
have  been  designed  to  prepare  the  Romans  for  a  visit  from 
the  apostle;   but  its  chief  aim  was  to  guide  the  church  to 

1  For  a  full  discussion  of  these  points  see  Sand4Y  and  Headlam, 
Internat,  Com,  on  Rom.^  pp.  Ixxxv.-xcviii.,  and  Lightfoot,  Biblical 
Essays.  Among  recent  critics  who  assign  xvi.  to  Ephesus  are  Weiss, 
Introd.  (Eng.  trans.,  pp.  321,  322);  Jt)LiCHER,  Einleitung^  pp.  72-74; 
HoLTZMANN,  EinUitung,  pp.  242-246;  Pfleiderer,  Urchristentkum^ 
p.  145  ;  LiPSius,  Hand.-Com  on  Rom.^  p.  86.  On  the  other  hand  the 
integrity  of  the  epistle  is  maintained  among  recent  critics  by  Godet, 
Introd.^  Vol.  L,  pp.  468-482,  and  Zahn,  Einleitung,  Vol.  I.,  pp.  267-298. 


382  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

full  Christian  liberty  and  righteousness  by  faith,  and  then 
to  guard  against  antinomianism  and  inculcate  brotherly 
charity.  If  the  epistle  had  been  issued  in  successive  editions 
to  various  churches,  it  might  be  regarded  as  a  general 
presentation  of  St.  Paul's  gospel.  It  was  natural  that  he 
should  desire  to  send  such  a  document  to  Rome,  the 
metropolis  of  the  world.  Much  as  the  positive  theme  of 
this  epistle  resembles  that  of  Galatians,  it  must  be  observed 
that  the  error  opposed  is  not  the  same,  for  while  in  Galatians 
St.  Paul  resists  Judaistic  Christianity,  here  it  is  Judaism,  pure 
and  simple,  with  which  he  contrasts  the  new  gospel  of  God- 
given  righteousness  through  faith. 

e.  Date  and  Place  of  Origin. — The  epistle  is  written  from 
Achaia  (xv.  25,  26),  therefore  probably  from  Corinth.  The 
occasion  must  be  the  second  visit  recorded  in  Acts  (xx.  2). 
It  could  not  be  the  first,  that  of  Acts  xviii.,  because  the 
apostle  had  preached  the  gospel  as  far  as  Illyricum.  (Romans 
XV.  19.)  This  gives  us  as  a  probable  date  early  in  a.d.  58. 
The  epistle  has  many  echoes  of  the  vehement  Galatian  epistle, 
and  seems  to  have  been  written  soon  after  it.^ 

f.  Contefits. — The  epistle  falls  into  two  parts:  (i)  Doc- 
trinal; (2)  Practical. 

i.  1-7,  Opening  salutation. 

8-17,  Interest  in  the  Romans.  Desire  to  visit  and  help 
them. 

Part  i.     Doctrinal^  i.  i8-xi.  36. 

(i)  Universal  sinfulness,  i.-iii.  20. 

i.  18-32,  Seen  in  the  degraded  state  of  the  pagan  world. 

ii..  Without  excuse  when  also  found  among  the  Jews.  This 
shows  contempt  of  God's  law.  They  who  have  not  the  law 
are  a  law  to  themselves,  having  the  law  of  conscience  in  their 
hearts.  Jews  the  more  to  blame  for  not  practising  what  they 
preach.  The  true  Jew  must  be  one  inwardly;  the  true  cir- 
cumcision that  of  the  heart. 

iii.  1-8,  The  Jew's  privilege.  He  has  the  oracles  of  God. 
God's  wrath  just. 

*  See  LiGHTFOOT,  Galatians,  pp.  45-48. 


ROMANS  383 

9-20,  Scripture  testimony  to  sin.     No  excuse. 

(2)  Justification  and  its  effects,  iii.  21-viii. 

iii.  21-31,  God's  righteousness,  apart  from  law,  through 
faith  in  Christ,  whom  God  set  forth  to  be  a  medium  of 
mercy.     Therefore  all  exulting  on  our  part  is  excluded. 

iv.,  Abraham  justified  by  faith. 

V.  I -I  I,  Justification  leading  to  peace  and  proving  God's  love. 

12-21,  The  analogy  of  Adam.  As  sin  entered  through  one 
man,  Adam,  so  the  free  gift  enters  through  one,  Christ;  but 
with  differences. 

vi.  I -1 4,  Antinomianism  excluded  : — Shall  we  sin  that  grace 
may  abound  1  No;  because  the  old  self  is  dead,  crucified 
with  Christ,  and  we  now  live  in  Him. 

15-23,  Shall  we  sin  because  we  are  not  under  law?  No; 
because  we  are  no  longer  servants  of  sin,  but  servants  of 
righteousness. 

vii.  1-6,  The  analogy  of  the  woman  who  is  free  to  marry 
again  when  her  husband  is  dead.  We,  dead  to  the  law,  can 
be  united  to  Christ. 

7-25,  The  use  of  the  law  in  rousing  the  consciousness  of  sin. 

It  is  much  disputed  whether  this  passage  is  autobiographical,  and  if 
so,  whether  it  refers  to  the  apostle's  present  or  past  experience.  The 
intense  feeling  that  pervades  it  points  to  real  experience.  In  favour 
of  its  referring  to  the  present  the  actual  struggles  of  Christian  men 
are  appealed  to.  On  the  other  hand,  St.  Paul  begins  with  a  sort 
of  biographical  recital,  mentioning  first  the  unconscious  innocence  of 
childhood,  and  then  the  awakening  of  conscience  (verse  9).  The  struggle 
follows  without  any  mention  of  the  great  change  of  regeneration.  And 
further,  chapter  viii.  points  to  the  serenity  of  the  Christian  in  contrast 
with  the  misery  depicted  in  chapter  vii. 

viii.,  The  life  of  the  Spirit.  Sonship,  redemption,  inter- 
cession, triumph. 

(3)  The  fate  of  the  Jews,  ix.-xi. 

God  has  a  right  to  choose  whom  He  will.  The  Jews 
rejected  because  of  unbelief. 

Baur  regarded  this  as  the  chief  part  of  the  epistle.  Others  have  held 
it  to  be  out  of  harmony  with  the  rest  of  the  espistle,  and  almost  an 
incumbrance.  But  after  rejecting  Judaism  it  is  natural  that  St.  Paul 
should  consider  the  people  most  interested  in  it,  his  own  people  too, 
and  their  position  in  the  light  of  the  new  teaching. 


384  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Part  ii.     Practical^  xii.-xvi. 

xii.,  Gifts  and  corresponding  duties. 

xiii.,  Duties  to  rulers,  to  our  neighbours;  awaking  to  the 
light. 

xiv.-xv.  13,  The  weak  in  faith  to  be  received  and  not 
disturbed.  Some  conscientiously  refuse  to  eat  meat  and 
observe  days.  The  stronger  and  freer  have  not  these 
scruples.     The  strong  should  bear  the  burdens  of  the  weak. 

The  question  here  raised  is  different  from  that  in  i  Corinthians  con- 
cerning the  lawfulness  of  eating  meat  offered  to  idols.  There  is  no 
reference  to  idols  and  heathen  sacrifices  in  Romans.  The  "weak" 
refuse  to  eat  meat  at  all,  practise  vegetarianism  as  a  matter  of  conscience. 
These  would  not  be  the  Jewish  section  of  the  church,  unless  they  were 
Essenes ;  but  it  is  not  likely  that  this  obscure  party  which  had  its  home 
by  the  Dead  Sea  would  be  represented  at  Rome.  It  is  more  probable 
that  Pythagorean  ideas  were  affecting  some  of  the  Gentile  part  of  the  church. 
Then  the  observing  of  days  would  not  refer  to  Jewish  Sabbath -keeping, 
etc.,  but  to  pagan  notions  of  lucky  and  unlucky  days. 

XV.  14-33,  Concluding  personal  remarks  on  the  apostle's 
work  and  his  desire  to  visit  Rome  and  Spain. 

xvi.  I,  2,  Commendation  of  Phoebe,  a  helper  and  support 
of  the  church  at  Cenchrcea. 

3-16,  A  number  of  individual  salutations. 

17-20,  Warning  against  false  teachers. 

21-23,  Salutations  from  St.  Paul's  companions. 

25-27,  Concluding  Doxology. 

7.  Characteristics  of  the  Group. 

These  four  great  epistles,  i  and  2  Corinthians,  Galatians, 
Romans,  all  written  within  a  twelvemonth  and  separated  by 
four  years  from  the  preceding  group,  and  by  another  four 
years  from  the  next  group  of  epistles,  stand  by  themselves 
as  containing  between  them  the  most  complete  and  vigorous 
presentation  of  the  apostle's  teaching.  The  least  disputed 
books  in  the  N.T.,  they  have  been  named  "  the  quadrilateral 
of  Christianity,"  and  it  has  been  shown  that  if  we  possessed 
no  other  documents  it  would  be  possible  to  substantiate  the 
main  facts  and  principles  of  the  Christian  religion  on  the 
basis  of  these  epistles.     They  show  us  St.  Paul  at  the  height 


CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE  GROUP    385 

of  his  power,  burdened  with  the  care  of  the  churches,  and 
harassed  by  the  antagonism  of  opponents  who  claim  the 
authority  and  prestige  of  the  older  type  of  Christianity 
prevalent  at  the  mother  church  of  Jerusalem.  At  first 
St  Paul's  liberalism  is  practical — the  free  offer  of  the 
gospel  to  the  world  at  large.  But  controversy  stimulates 
an  intellectual  justification  of  it.  Thus  in  these  epistles 
where  that  process  is  carried  on  we  see  the  genesis  of 
Christian  theology  as  a  subject  of  thought.  All  through 
the  controversy  St.  Paul  is  forced  to  defend  his  own 
apostleship  and  authority.  Then  he  has  to  defend  what 
he  calls  his  gospel.  This,  in  distinction  from  that  of  the 
Judaisers,  is  negatively  a  repudiation  of  the  law  as,  first, 
not  of  any  service  to  Gentiles,  and  further,  as  abolished 
altogether  even  for  Jews  who  become  Christians.  Then 
positively  his  gospel  is  developed  as  the  good  news  of 
the  gift  of  eternal  life  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  forensically 
regarded  as  announcing  God's  gift  of  righteousness  in 
Christ  received  by  us  through  faith.  St.  Paul  paints  sin 
in  the  darkest  colours.  Its  consequence  is  death.  All 
mankind  are  sinners,  under  the  wrath  of  God.  When 
explaining  the  relation  of  Christ  to  the  gospel  St.  Paul 
teaches  His  Divinity — He  is  God's  Son  and  the  fountain 
of  grace;  and  also  His  humanity — He  was  born  of  a 
woman.  The  cross  is  most  significant  with  St.  Paul.  It 
is  not  only  that  Jesus  is  Christ  in  spite  of  being  crucified, 
nor  that  the  crucifixion  was  foreordained  in  the  mysterious 
purposes  of  God,  but  it  took  a  great  part  in  our  redemption. 
Christ  died  on  our  behalf  (v-rrep  rnxCdv),  and  because  of  our 
sins.  He  was  treated  as  a  sinner  ("  made  sin  ")  for  us  that 
we  might  have  God's  righteousness.  The  resurrection  com- 
pleted Christ's  work  and  established  our  justification.  By 
faith  this  is  ours.  Our  faith  unites  us  to  Christ,  so  that 
we  die  with  Him,  rise  with  Him,  live  in  Him.  This  is 
the  mystical  part  of  St.  Paul's  teaching  that  becomes  more 
apparent  in  the  third  group.  Thus  united  with  Christ  we 
become  God's  sons  by  adoption,  and  joint  heirs  with  Christ. 
2  c 


386  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

The  consequence  is  the  firstfruits  of  the  Spirit,  from  which 
come  the  insight  of  spiritual  discernment,  purifying  and 
consecrating  grace,  and  specific  gifts  (charismata).  Thus 
privileged,  the  Christian  is  under  the  highest  obligation  to 
live  a  holy  life,  cultivating  above  all  else  the  grace  of 
love.  Brotherly  love  between  Christians  is  especially  to  be 
cherished,  and  each  member  of  the  Church  to  take  his 
right  place  according  to  his  gift  in  ministering  to  the  good  of 
the  whole  body.  At  the  same  time  duties  to  the  outer  world 
are  to  be  carefully  observed.  Christians  live  in  expectation 
of  the  return  of  Christ  to  judge  the  world  and  establish  His 
kingdom.  Then  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  Uve  again,  and  share 
in  the  blessed  future. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  PAULINE   EPISTLES:   THIRD   GROUP 
The  Epistles  Written  in  Prison 


The  place  and  time  of  imprisonment. 

1.  Colossians. 

2.  Philemon. 


3.  Ephesians. 

4.  Philippians. 

5.  Characteristics  of  the  Group. 


Another  interval  of  some  years  (probably  four)  separates 
the  epistles  of  the  third  group  from  those  of  the  preceding 
period.  The  four  epistles  of  this  group  were  all  written  during 
St.  Paul's  imprisonment.  In  Colossians  he  refers  to  the 
mysteries  of  the  Christ,  "  for  which  also,"  he  adds,  **  I  am 
also  in  bonds"  (SeSe/xat,  iv.  3),  and  he  pathetically  exclaims, 
"  Remember  my  bonds."  (verse  18.)  In  Philemon  he  writes 
as  "Paul  a  prisoner  of  Christ  Jesus"  (i),  "now  a  prisoner 
also  of  Jesus  Christ "  (9),  while  Onesimus  is  his  child 
"begotten  in  the  bonds,"  who  could  minister  to  him  "in 
the  bonds  of  the  gospel."  (13.)  In  Ephesians  he  is  "the 
prisoner  of  Christ  Jesus"  (iii.  i),  and  "the  prisoner  in  the 
Lord."  (iv.  i.)  In  Philippians  he  refers  four  times  to  "my 
bonds."  (i.  7,  13,  14,  17.)  It  is  impossible  to  assign  these 
epistles  to  any  imprisonment  earlier  than  that  which  followed 
the  apostle's  arrest  in  Jerusalem  (a.d.  58;  Acts  xxi.  33),  after 
which  he  was  detained  by  Felix  for  two  years  at  Csesarea 
(Acts  xxiv.  27),  and  then  sent  to  Rome,  on  his  appeal  to 
Caesar,  where  he  was  two  years  in  his  own  hired  house  before 
his  trial.  (Acts  xxviii.  30.)  But  it  is  a  question  whether  the 
letters  were  written  from  Csesarea  or  from  Rome.  The  prob- 
ability, however,  is  in  favour  of  Rome,  where  St.  Paul  had 

387 


388  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

more  liberty  of  action  and  intercourse,  and  towards  the  end 
of  the  imprisonment,  /.<?.,  about  a.d.  62. 

Some  who  admit  that  three  of  these  epistles  were  written  from  Rome, 
detach  Philippians,  which  they  assign  to  Coesarea,  while  others  reverse  this 
position.  In  favour  of  Coesarea  as  the  place  of  writing  one  or  more  of 
these  epistles,  are  the  following  arguments  : — (i)  For  Philippiayts  in 
particular  that  the  mention  of  the  "prastorium"  (Philippians  i.  13)  is 
explained  by  the  fact  that  according  to  Acts  xxiii.  35,  St.  Paul  was 
confined  in  Herod's  *  *  przetorium  "  at  Coesarea.  But  the  expression  may 
well  refer  to  the  '*  praetorian  guard "  at  Rome,  in  charge  of  which  the 
apostle  was  placed.  On  the  other  hand,  '*  Caesar's  household  "  (Philippians 
iv.  22)  plainly  points  to  Rome.  So  does  St.  Paul's  allusion  to  the  progress 
of  his  work  (i.  I2  ft'.),  since  he  found  new  ground  for  evangelising  at 
Rome,  while  Coesarea  was  already  a  familiar  centre  of  apostolic  labours  ; 
and  the  freedom  for  this  work  was  found  at  Rome  while  the  apostle  was  in 
his  own  house,  as  it  was  not  found  at  Caesarea,  where  he  was  kept  in  a 
dungeon,  though  kindly  treated.^ 

(2)  For  the  other  epistles. — In  Philippians  ii,  24  St.  Paul  intends  to 
proceed  from  Rome  to  Macedonia,  whereas  when  he  wrote  Philemon  22 
he  wished  to  go  straight  to  Colossoe.  Further,  his  request  for  a  lodging 
to  be  prepared  there  implies  his  expectation  of  speedy  release,  which  he 
could  not  cherish  at  Rome."  But  Philemon  went  with  Colossians,  and 
Ephesians  must  have  been  written  about  the  same  time.  Therefore,  it  is 
argued,  all  three  must  be  assigned  to  Coesarea.  On  the  other  hand  it  must  be 
allowed  that  St.  Paul  could  change  his  intended  route ;  and  the  request  for 
a  lodging  might  be  a  playful  hint  of  his  urgent  desire  to  come  to  Colossoe. 
But  it  is  pointed  out  that  Tacitus  describes  the  destruction  of  Colossoe  in 
A.D.  60,^  and  yet  St.  Paul  makes  no  reference  to  the  fact.  Therefore,  it 
is  argued,  he  must  have  written  before  that  date.  But  Lightfoot  shows 
that  Eusebius,  who  mentions  that  the  three  cities  of  Asia,  Laodicea, 
Hierapolis,  and  Colossoe,  were  destroyed  by  earthouake  four  years  later,  is 
especially  accurate  in  his  dates  of  earthquakes,^  and  Tacitus  has  been 
proved  to  be  wrong  in  the  case  of  another  earthquake.'  The  comparative 
freedom  of  the  apostle's  life  at  Rome  is  the  convincing  reason  for  assigning 
the  origin  of  all  four  epistles  to  that  city.  Resemblances  to  the  pastoral 
epistles  also  make  for  Ephesians  and  Colossians  being  late.  Philippians  i. 
24-26  shows  that  St.  Paul  expects  an  acquittal,  and  therefore  the  attitude 
of  this  epistle  is  not  so  different  from  that  of  Philemon,  with  its  expecta- 
tion of  being  soon  able  to  visit  Colossoe. 

I.  Colossians. 

a.  The  City  and  the  Church, — Colossae  was  a  Phrygian  city 
in  the  Roman  province  of  Asia,  one  of  the  three  cities  of  the 

1  See  Lightfoot,  Phil.,  p.  29. 

2  See  Weiss,  Introd.  to  the  N.T.^  Eng.  trans.,  vol.  i.  p.  327. 
8  Ann.  xiv.  27. 

*  Col.  (ed.  1875),  pp.  37-40. 

"  Suetonius,  Nero^  160, 172.  Cited  in  Hort,  Rom,  and  Eph.,  p.  106. 


COLOSSIANS  3B9 

Lycus  Valley.  The  Lycus  is  a  tributary  of  the  Mseander,  and 
two  of  the  cities,  large,  important  places,  Laodicea  and  Hiera- 
polis,  faced  one  another  on  opposite  sides  of  the  stream,  while 
Colossae  was  an  insignificant  town — much  the  smallest  town  to 
which  the  apostle  addressed  any  of  his  extant  letters — twelve 
miles  further  up,  and  therefore  more  in  the  heart  of  Phrygia. 
The  church  at  Colossae  had  not  been  founded  by  St.  Paul, 
and  he  had  never  visited  it  when  he  wrote  his  epistle.  The 
narrative  of  Acts  does  not  bring  the  apostle  through  the 
Lycus  Valley,  and  in  the  epistle  he  only  writes  of  hearing  of 
the  faith  and  love  of  the  Colossians  (Colossians  i.  4),  refers 
gratefully  to  the  day  when  the  first  news  of  their  recep- 
tion of  the  gospel  had  reached  him  (verse  9),  and  describes 
the  Colossians  as  people  who  had  not  seen  his  face  in  the 
flesh,  (ii.  I.)  And  yet  the  church  was  in  an  especial  way 
under  his  charge,  for  it  had  been  founded  by  Epaphras,  the 
evangelist  whom  St.  Paul  had  directly  commissioned  to  visit 
the  district  where  it  was  situated.  (7,  8.) 

b.  Genuineness  of  the  Epistle. — This  epistle  is  well  attested 
by  external  evidence,  being  mentioned  by  Irenaeus,  Clement, 
and  Tertullian,  at  the  end  of  the  second  century,  probably  cited 
by  Justin  Martyr  in  the  middle  of  the  century,  and  included 
in  Marcion's  canon  still  earlier.  It  is  essentially  Pauline  in 
doctrine,  and  its  profound  spiritual  character  makes  for  the 
honesty  of  its  claim.  Dr.  Lightfoot  has  shown  that  there  is 
nothing  in  its  teaching  that  betrays  second  century  ideas  or 
conflicts  with  the  period  of  St.  Paul's  lifetime.^  Although  its 
genuineness  is  not  so  almost  universally  admitted  as  that  of 
the  epistles  of  the  second  group,  it  is  accepted  by  critics  who 
reject  Ephesians,  and  opinion  is  growing  in  favour  of  its  being 
an  original  work  of  St.  Paul's.^ 

*  See  Lightfoot,  CoL^  Introd.  ii..  The  Colossian  Heresy. 

"  Hilgenfeld  followed  Baur  in  rejecting  it ;  Pfleiderer  allowed  there 
were  fragments  of  St.  Paul's  writings  in  it.  Later  it  has  been  vindicated 
by  Von  Soden,  Jiilicher,  Zahn,  and  Sanday.  It  is  generally  accepted 
by  English  and  American  scholars,  Lightfoot,  T.  K.  Abbott,  Peake, 
Bacon,  etc. 


390  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

For  external  evidence  compare  Barnabas  xii.  7  {rov  'IrjaoO,  &n  iv  a^v 
Travra  Kal  els  ainbv)  with  Colossians  i.  16.  Justin  Martyr  repeatedly  re- 
minds us  of  a  striking  phrase  of  the  epistle,  rhv  irponbroKov  rCbv  irdvTcvv, 
Tryph.,  84;  irpuTordKov  irdarjs  KTlaews,  Tryph.^  85  ;  TrpiarbroKOv  /xiv  rov 
Qeov  Kal  irpd  wdvTUv  rdv  KTi<xp.a.r(j)v^  Tryph.,  ICO,  suggesting  an  allusion 
to  Colossians  i.  15  ("the  firstborn  of  all  creation,"  irpuToroKos  Trdarji 
KTlaetos).  This  is  the  more  striking,  because  Philo,  with  whom  Justin 
seems  to  be  acquainted,  never  has  this  phrase,  but  uses  irpurrdyovos  {De 
Agric.y  12;  De  Somn.^  i.  37).  Compare  also  Tatian  (Justin's  disciple), 
Orat.  ad  Graec,  5.  The  epistle  is  in  the  Syriac  and  Old  Latin  versions, 
and  is  recognised  in  the  Miiratorian  Fragment.  Moreover,  Colossians  is 
indirectly  attested  by  Philemon.  The  two  epistles  are  closely  associated, 
and  there  is  strong  reason  for  accepting  Philemon. 

The  objections  are  wholly  on  internal  grounds  :  (i)  The 
heresy  opposed  has  been  regarded  as  some  form  of  second 
century  gnosticism ;  but  Dr.  Lightfoot  showed  that  this  con- 
tained none  of  the  later  gnostic  peculiarities,  and  was  more 
likely  to  be  a  Jewish  speculation.  (2)  The  doctrine  of  Christ 
is  more  advanced  than  in  St.  Paul's  recognised  epistles. 
Christ  here  appears  as  the  centre  of  the  universe.  All  things 
have  been  created  not  only  through  Him  (8t'  avrov),  but  also 
"unto  Him"  (ci's  avTov,  i.  16).  Elsewhere  this  is  said  of  God 
the  Father  in  distinction  from  Jesus  Christ  {e.g.^  Romans 
xi.  36 ;  I  Corinthians  viii.  6.)  This  led  Von  Soden  to  regard 
the  passage  as  an  interpolation.  But  may  we  not  take  it 
as  an  advance  in  the  development  of  St.  Paul's  Christology? 
(3)  The  style  is  regarded  as  un-Pauline.  The  old  vehemence 
disappears,  and  we  have  long,  cumbrous  sentences  in  place 
of  the  short,  abrupt  utterances  of  the  earlier  epistles.  In 
reply  it  may  be  said  that  St.  Paul  is  mellowed  and  calmed 
with  age  and  subdued  by  his  long  confinement,  and  that 
the  controversies  which  engaged  him  earlier  have  passed 
away.  (4)  The  vocabulary  of  these  epistles  contains  many 
words  not  found  hitherto  in  St.  Paul's  epistles.  This  difficulty 
is  partly  met  in  two  ways :  Firsts  the  residence  at  Rome 
would  bring  the  apostle  into  fresh  associations,  and  the 
imprisonment  give  him  leisure  for  reading  and  thus  en- 
larging his  knowledge  of  Greek  words.  Second^  the  subjects 
treated — in  particular  the  Colossian  heresy — by  introducing 
a  new  series  of  ideas,  would  stimulate  a  corresponding  fresh- 


COLOSSIANS  391 

ness  of  language.  And  yet  it  must  be  confessed  that  these 
answers  do  not  entirely  remove  the  difficulty.  Perhaps  we 
should  accept  the  suggestion  that  Timothy,  as  St.  Paul's 
amanuensis,  was  allowed  more  liberty  in  the  case  of  this 
epistle,  so  that  the  association  of  his  name  with  the  apostle's 
in  the  opening  sentence  was  not  merely  nominal.^  These 
difficulties  do  not  destroy  the  strong  evidence  for  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  epistle.  It  is  highly  improbable  that  a  work  so 
profound  in  its  spiritual  thought  as  Colossians  should  have 
been  falsely  ascribed  to  St.  Paul.  The  character  of  the 
epistle  and  the  greatness  of  its  thought  make  for  its  genuine- 
ness. 

c.  Occasion  of  Writings  etc. — As  St.  Paul  was  writing  to 
Philemon  on  a  personal  matter,  he  would  be  led  to  think 
of  sending  a  letter  to  the  church  in  the  city  where  his  friend 
lived.  Epaphras,  the  founder  of  the  church  at  Colossae, 
who  was  now  with  the  apostle  at  Rome  (iv.  12),  may  have 
brought  information  about  the  disturbing  teachers  which 
would  have  prompted  St.  Paul  to  counteract  their  errors. 
The  letter  is  to  be  conveyed  by  Tychichus,  who  is  to  give 
personal  information  concerning  the  apostle's  affairs  (iv.  7), 
which  perhaps  it  would  not  have  been  safe  to  have  committed 
to  writing. 

d.  Contents. 

i.  I,  2,  Salutation  from  Paul  and  Timothy. 

^  Thirty-four  words  are  found  nowhere  else  in  the  N.T.,  viz.,  ddv/xeiv, 
alaxpoXoyla,  dveyj/ids,  dvTavairXTjpovv,  d.vTair6do<ris,  d,TreK5ve<rdai,  dW/cSiicris, 
d7r6x/»70'ts,  dpe<TK€la,  d(f>€idia,  ^pa^eveiUy  doyfiarl^eadaL,  dvvafjLovu  (but 
Ephesians  vi.  10  has  idwa/xoOade),  ideXoOprjcTKeLa,  eiprjvoTrouiv,  4/x^aT€V€iVf 
eOxdpi.aTos,  Oe&rrjs,  KaraPpa^eOeiu,  ixeraKiveiv,  fio/xipi^,  pov/xrjpia,  oparSs, 
vapriyopia,  widauoKoyia,  TrXrja/xovq,  irpoaKOveiy,  irpocrfKovv^  irpwreieLv, 
orept'w/xai,  avKayuryetv,  au/xaTiKus,  (t>i.\o<TO(f>la,  x^'^P^yp^^^^'  Twelve 
occur  in  other  N.T.  writers,  but  not  elsewhere  in  St.  Paul,  viz.,  ^\ay, 
ivoKplveffdai,  d-rrdKpvcpos,  dpr^eiv,  yeieadai,  deiy/MiTli^eiv,  i^aKel<p€i.v^ 
vapaXoyl^eadai,  iriKpaiveiv,  vduos,  (TKtd,  (TvydovKoi,  and  three  in  the 
pastoral  epistles,  viz.,  diroKeiadai,  KpvirT€Lv,  rXova-icos.  On  the  other 
hand  this  epistle  contains  eleven  Pauline  words  used  by  no  other  N.T. 
writer,  viz.,  dwelvai.,  edpaios,  cIkt]  (?),  ipedi^eiVf  dptafi^ei^etp,  UavoOy, 
la&TTjSy  irddos,  trvvaixfJ'dXcjTos,  avvdaTTTeiv,  (pvaiovv — an  important  make- 
weight in  favour  of  genuineness.  See  Abbott,  Ephesians  and  Colossians^ 
pp.  lix,  Ix. 


392  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

3-8,  Thanksgiving  for  the  gospel  reaching  Colossae  by 
means  of  Epaphras,  and  for  its  fruit  there  and  elsewhere. 

9-19,  All  things  summed  up  in  Christ,  through  whom 
and  for  whom  the  universe  was  created,  and  in  whom  it 
consists. 

20-23,  Reconciliation  through  Christ,  and  His  death. 

24-29,  The  apostle's  work  in  proclaiming  the  mystery  of 
the  gospel,  which  is  Christ  as  the  hope  of  glory  for  the 
Gentiles. 

ii.  1-5,  His  prayer  for  the  Colossians  that  they  may  be 
knit  together  in  love,  and  may  attain  to  the  knowledge  of 
God  in  Christ. 

6-15,  Exhortations,  especially  against  the  delusion  of  a 
false  philosophy,  appealing  to  the  new  life  of  those  who, 
buried  with  Christ  in  baptism,  are  also  raised  with  Him. 

16-23,  Warnings  against  the  bondage  of  external  ordinances. 

iii.  1-4,  Practical  appeal  to  seek  the  heavenly  things  in 
accordance  with  the  experience  of  being  risen  with  Christ. 

5-1 1,  Warnings  against  sensuality,  malice,  and  other  vices 
of  the  old  life. 

12-17,  Encouragements  to  live  the  Christian  life,  and  attain 
to  its  graces. 

iii.  i8-iv.  I,  Domestic  duties — wives  and  husbands,  children 
and  parents,  servants  and  masters. 

iv.  2-6,  Exhortations  to  prayer,  and  wisdom  and  grace  of 
speech. 

7-9,  Concerning  Tychicus  the  messenger  and  Onesimus 
the  beloved  brother. 

10-14,  Salutations  from  the  apostle's  companions. 

15,  16,  Messages  concerning  Laodicea,  and  an  exchange  of 
epistles. 

17,  A  message  to  Archippus  to  take  heed  to  his  ministry 
(or  deaconship). 

1 8,  Final  salutation  in  the  apostle's  own  handwriting. 

The  Colossian  Heresy. — It  is  evident  that  in  this  epistle  St.  Paul  is 
contending  against  some  false  teaching  which  was  put  forth  as  a 
philosophy,  i.e.,  as  a  rule  of  life.     This  was  Jewish,  in  the  observance 


PHILEMON  393 

of  Sabbaths  and  new  moons,  and  making  distinctions  in  food  (ii.  16-23); 
and  also  gnostic,  claiming  a  peculiar  intellectuality,  indulging  in  specula- 
tive tenets  concerning  cosmogony,  and  thus  associating  the  construction 
and  administration  of  the  universe  with  a  series  of  heavenly  beings. 
Hilgenfeld  took  these  two  elements  to  belong  to  different  parties,  but 
Lightfoot  showed  that  Jewish  speculations  and  practices,  having  an 
essential  affinity  of  type  with  those  of  the  Essenes,  would  account  for 
what  St.  Paul  refers  to.  The  Essenes  were  more  rigorous  than  the 
Pharisees  in  Sabbath-keeping,  and  were  ascetic  in  practice,  refusing 
flesh  and  wine,  and  not  marrying.  Philo  denies  that  they  were  given 
to  "abstract  philosophy,"  and  it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  these 
people  who  devoted  themselves  to  agriculture  in  Judsea,  and  of  whom 
we  never  read  elsewhere,  could  have  had  much  influence  in  IPhrygia. 
Still  there  is  reason  to  think  that  allied  tendencies  were  found  in  Asia 
Minor.  Essenism  owed  much  of  its  peculiarity  to  Oriental  influences 
which  were  more  powerful  in  Asia  Minor  than  where  it  arose.  There 
is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  special  ideas  of  gnosticism  sprang 
from  Christian  sources.  They  were  Greek  and  Oriental — partly  Persian, 
perhaps  Buddhist,  and  in  some  degree  to  be  traced  back  to  Babylonian 
astrology.  These  ideas  were  early  grafted  on  to  Jiudaism  ;  the  Kabbala 
is  one  of  the  fruits  of  this  union.  In  the  second  century  they  blossomed 
into  great  systems  of  thought  in  combination  with  Christianity.  In 
Colossians  we  see  them  pressing  into  the  Church  through  their  earlier 
alliance  with  Judaism.  The  Colossian  heresy  in  particular  dishonoured 
Christ  practically  by  bringing  in  angels  for  worship,  and  speculatively 
by  dividing  the  functions  of  creation,  etc.  among  these  beings.  All  that 
was  here  affirmed  of  the  angels  St.  Paul  claims  for  Christ,  who  is  supreme 
in  the  universe.^ 

2.  Philemon. 

This  beautiful  little  letter  bespeaks   its   own  genuineness 

beyond  question.     It  is  wholly  personal  in  character  and  aim, 

and  there  is  nothing  about  it  to  suggest  a  writer  with  doctrinal 

and  other  objects  sheltering  under  St.  Paul's  name. 

Philemon  is  in  Marcion's  and  the  Muratorian  Canons,  and  in  the  Syriac 
and  Old  Latin  versions.  It  is  not  cited  by  Irenoeus  or  Clement  A.,  but  its 
brevity  and  personal  character  will  account  for  that.  Tertullian  and 
Origen  refer  to  it. 

a.  Occasion  and  Circumstances  of  Origin.  —  Onesimus,  a 
slave  of  Philemon's,  having  stolen  some  of  his  master's 
property,  had  fled  to  Rome,  where  he  had  come  under  the 
influence  of  St.  Paul;  and  this  had  led  to  his  conversion. 
St.  Paul,  in  sending  him  back,  writes  to  beseech  Philemon  to 
pardon  the  defaulter,  and  receive  him  as  no  longer  merely  a 
slave,  but  a  brother  beloved.     The  mention  of  Archippus 

*  See  Lightfoot,  Colossians  and  Philemon^  "  The  Colossian  Heresy." 


394  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

here  (2)  and  in  Colossians  iv.  1 7  fixes  Colossae  as  the  place  at 
which  Philemon  lived.  Then  the  reference  to  Onesimus  in 
Colossians  iv.  9,  as  about  to  go  to  Colossre,  further  associates 
the  two  epistles.  Demas  and  Luke  also  send  salutations  in 
both  letters.  It  is  evident  that  this  little  letter  accompanied 
Colossians,  Tychicus  probably  taking  both;  or  possibly  One- 
simus, who  travelled  with  him,  took  the  letter,  which  was  for 
his  own  benefit. 

b.   Contents. 

i.  1-3,  Salutation  from  Paul  and  Timothy  to  Philemon,  and 
Apphia  (?  his  wife),  to  Archippus  and  the  church  in  Philemon's 
house. 

4-7,  Thanksgiving  for  Philemon's  love  and  faith. 

8-21,  A  pathetic  plea  for  the  pardon  of  Onesimus,  who  is 
now  a  brother  beloved  and  the  apostle's  spiritual  son  begotten 
in  his  bonds.  Paul  will  make  himself  responsible  for  what 
was  stolen. 

22,  A  lodging  to  be  prepared. 

23,  24,  Concluding  salutations. 
25,  Benediction. 

3.  Ephesians. 

a.  Destination  of  the  Letter > — There  are  strong  reasons  for 
believing  that  this  letter  was  not  written  to  the  church  at 
Ephesus.  The  title  represents  an  ancient  tradition,  but  it  is 
not  itself  authoritative,  as  in  no  cases  were  the  titles  of  the 
epistles  in  the  original  documents.  The  address  "to  the  saints 
which  are  at  Ephesus  "  (i.  i),  which  is  found  in  our  N.T.,  has 
not  the  support  of  the  two  best  MSS.  K  and  B,  which  omit 
the  words  "  in  Ephesus  "  (ev  'E<f)€(TO)).  These  words  are  also 
missing  in  a  late  cursive  MS.  (67),  as  corrected  by  a  second 
hand.  A  more  ancient  testimony  is  that  of  Origen,  early  in  the 
third  century,  who  writes  in  a  way  that  implies  the  absence  of 
these  two  words. ^  Still  earlier,  in  the  first  half  of  the  second 
century,  Marcion  accepted  the  epistle,  but  under  the  title, 

*  The  passage  in  Origen  taken  from  Cramer's  Catena,  p.  102,  is  cited 
in  Hort's  Hom.  and  Eph. ,  page  76,  footnote. 


EPHESIANS  395 

"To  the  Laodiceans."  He  could  hardly  have  done  so  if  the 
words  "  in  Ephesus  "  had  been  in  his  text.  Besides,  Tertullian 
would  have  accused  him  of  falsifying  the  words  of  the  apostle 
here.  As  he  does  not,  we  may  conclude  that  Tertullian  also 
knew  of  MSS.  from  which  the  words  were  omitted.^  The 
uncertainty  which  is  thus  suggested  is  met  by  a  decided  argu- 
ment against  the  Ephesian  destination  of  the  epistle  from  the 
tenor  of  its  contents.  Ephesus  was  one  of  the  chief  centres 
of  St.  Paul's  labours.  He  had  resided  and  worked  in  the  city 
for  more  than  two  years.  (Acts  xix.  lo.)  There  is  no  more 
touching  scene  in  the  history  of  the  early  church  than  his 
interview  with  the  Ephesian  elders  at  Miletus,  (xx.  17-38.) 
One  of  the  Ephesians  accompanied  him  to  Jerusalem, 
(xxi.  29.)  Here  then  was  a  church  of  his  most  intimate 
friends.  But  the  epistle  does  not  contain  a  word  of  in- 
dividual salutation.  No  name  is  mentioned  among  the 
people  to  whom  he  is  writing,  although  several  persons  are 
named  in  the  companion  epistle  to  the  Colossians,  a  people 
whom  confessedly  the  apostle  had  never  seen.^  Therefore  we 
may  confidently  conclude  that  this  epistle  could  not  have  been 
addressed  to  St.  Paul's  friends  at  Ephesus.  We  are  tempted 
to  imagine  that  Marcion  was  right,  and  that  it  was  addressed 
to  Laodicea,  one  of  the  three  cities  of  the  Lycus  Valley, 
which,  in  common  with  Colossae  and  Hierapolis,  the  apostle 
had  never  visited,  and  the  reference  to  the  exchange  of  epistles 
in  Colossians  iv.  16  would  seem  to  fall  in  with  that  idea.  And 
yet  the  phrase  there  is  not  "  the  epistle  to  Laodicea,"  but  "  the 
epistle  from  {Ik)  Laodicea,"  which  rather  points  to  one  that 
was  to  be  passed  on  through  that  city.  The  general  character 
of  our  epistle  favours  the  opinion  that  it  was  a  circular  letter 
for  the  churches  of  this  neighbourhood. 

We  still  have  to  account  for  the  singular  condition  of  the  text  in  the 
MSS.  above  referred  to,  where  we  read  roi%  ay  lots  rois  odaiv  [omitting  ^v 
'E0^(r(^]  Koi  irta^Tots.      One  view  is  to  render  oCaiv  absolutely,  with  the 

1  See  Tertullian,  Adv.  Marc,  v.  11,  17. 

^  The  phrase,  '*  If  so  be  that  ye  heard  {etye  rjKOvaaTe,  iii.  2),  though  not 
expressing  a  doubt,  could  not  be  used  in  a  case  of  absolute  certainty,  such 
as  that  of  a  church  St.  Paul  had  himself  taught. 


396  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

meaning,  "  the  saints  who  truly  exist — as  such,  etc."    But  this  is  a  forced 

and  unnatural  interpretation.  Another  view  favoured  by  Hort  is  "  the 
saints  who  are  also  faithful."  Against  this  is  the  application  of  this  same 
participle  of  the  verb  elfii  in  other  epistles,  where  it  directs  attention  to  the 
place.  ^  Possibly  a  blank  was  left  for  the  name  of  the  church  to  be  filled 
in.  This  might  be  done  in  writing  if  several  copies  had  been  written  off ; 
but  the  notion  is  too  modern.  Besides,  it  excludes  the  idea,  otherwise 
probable  enough,  that  Ephesians  may  be  the  epistle  which  was  to  come  on 
from  Laodicea.  A  simpler  method  would  be  to  send  a  single  copy  with- 
out any  name,  leaving  the  name  of  each  church  receiving  the  epistle  to  be 
supplied  by  the  reader.  Ephesus,  being  the  metropolis  of  the  province, 
would  naturally  receive  it  in  the  end,  and  then  nothing  would  be  more 
natural  than  for  somebody  to  fill  in  the  gap  with  the  name  of  the  city 
where  the  epistle  was  subsequently  found. 

b.  Genuineness. — The  external  evidence  for  this  epistle  is 
stronger  than  that  for  Colossians.  It  seems  to  have  been 
known  to  Clement  R.  as  early  as  a.d.  95.  Evidently  it  was 
quoted  by  Ignatius  early  in  the  second  century,  and  by 
Polycarp,  and  it  was  accepted  by  Marcion  before  a.d.  140. 

Compare  i  Clem.  xlvi.  5,  '*  Have  we  not  one  God,  and  one  Christ, 
and  one  Spirit  of  grace  poured  out  upon  us,  and  one  calling  in 
Christ,"  with  Ephesians  iv.  4 ;  Ignatius,  Magnes.  vii.  i  with  Ephesians 
iv.  3-6  ;  Phil.  ii.  i  with  Ephesians  v.  8 ;  Ad  Polyc.  v.  i  with 
Ephesians  v.  25,  29  ;  Polycarp,  Phil,  i.  3  with  Ephesians  ii.  8,  9 ;  and 
possibly  Ibid.  xii.  i,  where  "Irascimini,  et  nolite  peccare"  is  quoted 
as  scripture  {«/  in  his  scripturis  dictum  esl),  with  Ephesians  iv.  26. 
But  we  only  have  this  last  quotation  in  a  Latin  translation ;  possibly  in 
both  cases  it  is  taken  from  some  Logia  of  Jesus  Christ ;  or  it  may  be  an 
allusion  to  Psalm  iv.  4,  LXX.  The  epistle  is  in  Marcion's  and  the  Mura- 
torian  Canons,  and  in  the  Old  Latin  and  Syriac  versions.  It  is  first  named 
as  St.  Paul's  by  Irenaeus.  {Adv.  H<ur.^  v.  2.  3.) 

Moreover  it  shares  with  Colossians  the  general  Pauline 
standpoint,  and  is  rich  in  vital  spiritual  thought,  one  of  the 
gems  of  Scripture.  It  is  hard  to  doubt  the  genuineness  of 
a  work  of  such  paramount  worth. 

Nevertheless  it  is  more  questioned  than  Colossians.^  The 
objections  are  largely  the  same  as  those  urged  against 
Colossians.  We  have  the  advanced  Christology,  though 
not  so  pronounced  with  regard  to  the  universe  and  creation 

1  Tois  o\)<ji.v  iv'Pwfjir]  (Rom.  i.  7),r^  ovarj  iv  Koplvdi^  (i  Cor.  i.  2),  rots 
oD<rtJ'  iv  4?i\iirTois  (Phil.  i.  i). 

2  Von  Soden,  for  instance,  who  defends  Colossians,  ascribing  Ephesians 
to  a  large-minded  Jewish  Christian  of  the  dispersion. 


EPHESIANS  39; 

as  in  Colossians,  the  same  style  of  long  sentences,  the  same 

phenomena  of  un-Pauline  words. 

There  are  thirty-two  words  used  only  in  this  epistle,  and  twenty-eight 
found  elsewhere  in  the  N.T.,  but  not  in  Paul.  On  the  other  hand  there 
are  eighteen  words  found  in  Pauline  epistles,  but  not  elsewhere  in  the 
N.T.,  and  several  of  the  hapax  legomena  are  in  the  list  of  the  Christian 
armour,  and  therefore  quite  naturally  accounted  for,  being  inevitable  when 
once  the  idea  of  elaborating  the  image  was  entertained. 

But  in  addition  to  these  objections,  which  may  be  met  as 
were  the  similar  objections  to  Colossians,  certain  special  ob- 
jections are  urged  against  Ephesians :  (i)  Whereas  previously 
St.  Paul  championed  the  Gentiles  against  the  Jews,  here  writ- 
ing to  Gentiles  he  seems  to  champion  the  Jewish  Christians. 
That,  however,  might  be  the  case  in  this  later  period 
when  liberty  was  secure,  and  among  churches  chiefly  Gentile. 
Moreover  the  idea  appears  in  Romans  xi.  13-24.  (2)  The 
expression,  "the  devil,"  occurs  twice  (iv.  27  ;  vi.  ii).  But  else- 
where St.  Paul  always  has  "Satan."  It  may  be  repHed  that 
elsewhere  in  the  N.T.  the  names  are  interchangeable.  Writing 
later  at  Rome  St.  Paul  might  prefer  the  Greek  term.  (3)  The 
phrase,  "  holy  apostles "  (iii.  5),  is  objected  to  as  more  like 
a  formula  of  later  ecclesiastical  usage.  But  we  must  re- 
member that  the  word  rendered  "holy"  (dytois)  is  the 
common  title  of  all  Christians,  and  points  to  consecration 
rather  than  to  personal  holiness.  It  occurs  a  little  later, 
where  St.  Paul  describes  himself  as  "less  than  the  least  of 
all  saints  "  (ayiwj/,  iii.  8).  (4)  The  most  singular  phenomena 
in  connection  with  the  epistle  is  its  close  resemblance  to 
Colossians.  Out  of  155  verses  no  less  than  78  have  ex- 
pressions identical  with  phrases  in  that  epistle.  Hence 
it  has  been  inferred  that  this  is  founded  on  Colossians,  of 
which  some  have  regarded  it  as  a  "  weak "  expansion.  As 
to  whether  it  is  "  weak,"  that  is  a  matter  of  taste.  The 
similarity  of  phrase  is  too  close  to  be  accidental.  But  if 
the  apostle  wrote  the  two  epistles  at  the  same  time,  it  would 
be  perfectly  natural  that  he  would  say  the  same  things  in 
both.  The  situation  was  so  far  similar,  that  both  epistles 
went  to  people  whom  the  apostle  had  not  seen.     Both  were 


398  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

sent  by  Tychicus.  (Colossians  iv.  7,  8;  Ephesians  vi.  21,  22.) 
Then  as  Ephesians  seems  to  be  a  circular  letter,  it  might 
be  less  crisp  than  one  written  with  a  more  definite  conception 
of  the  persons  to  whom  it  was  to  be  sent.^ 

c.  Occasion  and  Time  of  Writing. — Probably  Epaphras  in 
bringing  news  from  Colossae  had  reported  on  the  condition 
of  the  neighbouring  churches,  and  then  Tychicus,  who  was 
to  take  a  letter  to  Colossce,  would  be  able  to  carry  one  for 
the  other  churches  also.  In  particular  the  spread  of  Jewish 
gnostic  speculations  derogatory  to  the  supremacy  of  Christ 
and  His  sole  authority  in  the  Church  would  call  for  a  state- 
ment of  the  truth  concerning  this  subject.  As  the  two 
epistles  appear  to  have  been  written  about  the  same  time, 
it  is  of  little  consequence  to  inquire  which  was  produced 
first.  Still  the  larger  expansion  of  the  common  ideas  which 
we  find  in  Ephesians  may  perhaps  indicate  that  this  was 
written  after  its  companion. 

d.  Contents. 

i.  I,  2,  Salutation  from  Paul  only. 

3-14,  Thanksgiving,  leading  to  exposition  of  the  idea  of 
God's  purpose  in  adopting  us  as  sons  chosen  by  the  Father ; 
redeemed  by  the  Son,  in  whom  all  things  in  heaven  and  earth 
are  to  be  summed  up ;  and  sealed  by  the  Spirit. 

15-23,  Prayer  that  the  readers  may  appreciate  their  privileges 
in  Christ,  who  was  raised  from  the  dead,  and  is  exalted  above 
the  highest  powers  and  authorities. 

ii.  i-io.  Their  new  state  in  grace. 

11-22,  The  reconciliation  of  Jews  and  Gentiles  in  Christ. 

iii.  1-13,  The  revelation  of  the  gospel  for  the  Gentiles 
made  through  Paul. 

14-19,  Prayer  for  spiritual  progress  in  knowing  the  love  of 
Christ. 

20,  21,  Doxology. 

iv.  I -1 6,  Unity  in  the  body,  with  diversity  of  oflfices. 

^  Holtzpiann  supposes  there  was  a  Pauline  nucleus,  which  a  subsequent 
writer  enlarged  into  two  epistles,  an  elaborate  theory  which  seems  to  be 
adopted  as  a  counsel  of  despair.     Bacon  holds  it  to  be  genuine. 


I    I'NIVERS/TY   } 
t»KJLIPPIANS  399 

17-24,  Warnings  against  heathen  vices. 

25-32,  Practical  advice,  especially  as  regards  duty  to  our 
neighbour. 

V.  1-14,  To  walk  in  love,  and  avoid  immorality  and 
covetousness. 

15-21,  Care  in  conduct  to  avoid  offence;  praise  and  song. 

22-33,  The  union  of  husbands  and  wives  like  that  of  Christ 
and  His  Church. 

vi.  1-4,  Duties  of  children  and  parents. 

5-9,  Duties  of  servants  and  masters. 

10-20,  Exhortation  to  strength  and  courage;  the  whole 
armour  of  God. 

21,  22,  Personal  news  by  Tychicus. 

23,  24,  Benediction. 

Two  specific  ideas  of  great  importance  are  found  in  this 
epistle : 

(i)  The  Supremacy  of  Christ, — This  corresponds  to  similar 
teaching  in  Colossians.  Here,  as  in  the  companion  epistle, 
Christ  is  exalted  above  all  things  not  only  in  the  sphere 
of  the  gospel,  but  also  in  the  universe,  heavenly  as  well  as 
earthly.  But  in  this  epistle  the  supremacy  of  Christ  over  His 
Church  is  especially  emphasised. 

(2)  The  Unity  of  the  Church.-^ln  earlier  epistles  St.  Paul 
often  refers  to  individual  local  churches,  and  in  writing 
about  the  duties  of  their  members  he  dwells  on  the  im- 
portance of  harmony  in  co-operation.  But  here  he  rises 
to  the  conception  of  a  universal  Church  of  which  Christ  is 
the  head,  and  he  insists  on  its  essential  unity  realised  through 
the  common  faith  and  experience  of  all  Christians. 

4.  Philippians. 

a.  The  Church  at  Philippi. — Philippi  was  a  Roman  colony 
in  Macedonia,  and  the  church  in  this  city  was  the  first  planted 
by  St.  Paul  in  Europe.  The  vision  of  the  "man  of  Mace- 
donia " — whom  Professor  Ramsay  identifies  with  St.  Luke — 
had  induced  the  apostle  to  cross  from  Troas  to  the  port  of 
Neapolis,   whence  he  went  at  once  over  the  hills  to  the 


400  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 


beautiful  plain  where  Philippi  stood  on  a  promontory.     There 

was  no  synagogue  at  this  place,  but  St.  Paul  discovered  a 

Proseuche^  an  enclosure  for  worship,  in  the  suburbs,  apparently 

near  the  stream  Gangites.      His   teaching  w^on   Lydia,  who 

represented  a  dyeing  business  at  Thyatira,  and  she  received 

the  apostle  and  his  companions  into  her  house.      A  small 

church  was  formed,  at  first  consisting  principally  of  women. 

It  was  most  devoted  to  St.  Paul,  and  it  helped  to  support  him 

with  its  gifts  during   subsequent  missionary  journeys.     The 

troubles  which  disturbed  other  churches  were  scarcely  known 

here.      No  disloyalty  to  the  apostle  appeared  among  these 

enthusiastic  followers  as  at  Corinth  and  in  Galatia,  no  erroneous 

doctrine  as  in  the  churches  of  the  Lycus  Valley.  A  little  personal 

difference  between  two  active  women  in  the  church  is  all  the 

epistle  has  to  allude  to  as  not  quite  satisfactory.  (Phil.  iv.  2.) 

b.    Genuineness  of  the  Epistle. — The  difficulties  that  have 

been  felt  with  regard  to  Colossians  and  Ephesians  are  scarcely 

met  with  in  Philippians,  and  as  the  evidence  from  antiquity  and 

the  character  of  the  epistle  itself  strongly  support  St.  Paul's 

authorship,  it  is  very  generally  received  even  by  critics  who 

reject  the  other  epistles  of  the  imprisonment  period.    It  seems 

evident  that  this  epistle  was  known  and  cited  authoritatively 

early  in  the  second  century ;  it  fits  well  into  the  circumstances 

of  the  apostle's  life,  and  reveals  his  spirit  and  character  more 

distinctly  than  almost  any  other  of  his  writings. 

Hippolytus  refers  to  an  interpretation  of  the  phrase,  "in  the  form  of  a 
servant "  (Phil.  ii.  7),  by  a  very  primitive  Ophite  sect,  the  Sethites  {Ref. 
Haer.y  v.  8).  Polycarp,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Philippians,  refers  to  the  letter 
they  had  received  from  '*  the  blessed  and  glorious  Paul."  (Pol.  Phil.,  iii.  i.) 
Ignatius  appears  to  refer  to  phrases  from  this  epistle  [Rom.,  ii.  2  ;  Philad.^ 
viii.  2),  as  does  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus  (5).  It  is  cited  in  the  letter  of  the 
churches  of  Lyons  and  Vienne  (Euseb.,  H,E.^  v.  3).  It  is  in  Marcion's 
collection,  the  Muratorian  Canon,  the  Syriac  and  Old  Latin  versions. 
Irenreus  {Adv.  Haer.,  iv.  18.  4),  Clement  of  Alexandria  {Pcudag.^  i.  6 ; 
Stro7n.^  iv.  13),  and  TertuUian  {De  Resur.^  23,  47  ;  C.  Marc^  y.  20;  De 
Fraescr.,  26),  cite  it  as  St.  Paul's.^ 

^  The  epistle  was  rejected  by  Baur,  Schwegler,  etc.  More  recently  its 
genuineness  has  been  attacked  by  Hitzig,  Kreucker,  Hinsch,  Hoekstra, 
Biederman,  and  especially  by  Holsten.  But  it  is  accepted  and  defended  by 
Hilgenfeld,  Weizsacker,  Harnack,  Mangold,  Pfleiderer,  Lipsius,  Godet, 
B.  Weiss,  Holtzmann,  Julicher,  Klopper,  Zahn,  H.  A.  A.  Kennedy, 
Bacon — names  which  represent  very  diverse  schools,  and  some  of  them 
extreme  critical  positions. 


1 


PHILIPPIANS  401 

The  following  objections  have  been  brought  forward  : — (i)  The  separa' 
Hon  of  the  Divine  pre- existence  of  Christ  fro7n  His  humanity  (ii.  6-11)  as 
un-Pauline,  since  here  the  humanity  begins  at  the  Incarnation,  while  in 
I  Corinthians  xv.  47-49,  it  is  pre-existent  as  dvOpuiros  i-rroijpapios.  But  the 
iirotjpapcos  does  not  refer  to  pre-existence ;  it  refers  to  the  Resurrection. 
(2)  Un-Pauline  justification^  where  the  apostle  appears  as  blameless  with 
regard  to  the  law  (iii.  4-11).  But  that  was  external  ;  Romans  vii.,  etc., 
refer  to  his  internal  life.  (3)  Indifference  to  the  objective  truths  of  the 
gospel  {i.  15-18). — The  parties  preaching  another  Jesus,  and  anathematised 
in  Galatians  i.  6-9  and  2  Corinthians  xi.  4  are  said  to  be  here  allowed. 
But  they  are  not  the  same.  (4)  Uncertainty  concerning  the  Resurrection 
(iii.  11).  This  may  be  denied.  (5)  Differences  of  style.  These  are  far 
less  than  in  Colossians  and  Ephesians.  Other  objections  are  still  less 
important.  ^ 

c.  Occasion  for  Writing  the  Epistle. — Epaphroditus  had 
brought  a  contribution  of  money  from  the  Philippian  church 
(ii.  25,  iv.  18).  Either  owing  to  the  hardships  of  the  journey, 
or  his  exertions  on  behalf  of  the  apostle  in  Rome,  he  had 
been  dangerously  ill.  He  feared  the  Philippians  would  be 
anxious  about  him,  and  he  was  eager  to  return  home  (ii.  26). 
St.  Paul  sends  this  letter  with  him  containing  thanks  for  the 
gift  (iv.  10-18).  At  the  same  time  the  apostle  takes  the 
opportunity  to  give  an  account  of  his  own  condition,  and  of 
the  success  of  his  work  in  Rome,  and  to  fiood  his  letter  with 
thoughts  of  encouragement  and  admonitions  for  his  beloved 
friends  at  Philippi. 

d.  Date. — There  is  considerable  uncertainty  as  to  the  exact 
date  of  this  epistle  and  its  position  relative  to  the  other  epistles 
of  the  imprisonment.  Lightfoot  puts  it  first  in  the  group,  and 
in  this  he  is  followed  by  Hort.  The  principal  reason  for 
its  priority  is  the  position  it  seems  to  take  in  the  order  of 
the  development  of  St.  Paul's  thought  and  style.  It  has  more 
of  the  simple,  vigorous  style  of  the  earlier  epistles,  and  many 
phrases  remind  us  of  Romans.  On  the  other  hand  we  miss 
the  speculative  elements  of  Colossians  and  Ephesians,  and 
the  long  sentences  and  cumbrous  style  of  those  epistles. 
Therefore  Lightfoot  places  it  next  to  Romans,  though  with 
the  requisite  interval  of  time,  as  he  assigns  it  to  Rome.  But 
this  very  interval  tends  to  destroy  the  weight  of  his  argu- 

*  See  Vincent,  Intemat.  Crit.  Com.^  Phil,  and  Phile.,  pp.  xxv.-xxx. 
2   D 


402  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

ment.  Some  four  years  must  be  allowed  between  Romans 
and  Philippians,  even  if  Philippians  is  the  first  letter  of  the 
imprisonment,  and  at  most  two  or  three  years  separate  this 
from  Colossians  and  Ephesians.  Most  critics  place  it  last  in 
the  group. 

The  following  reasons  make  for  the  later  date  :— (i)  It  would  seem  that 
the  apostle  has  already  been  in  prison  for  a  long  time.  He  has  been  able 
to  make  Christ  known  through  the  whole  proetorian  guard  (i.  12-14).  (2) 
Friends  who  had  been  with  him  when  he  wrote  the  other  epistles  have 
now  left  him  (ii.  20).  St.  Luke  had  accompanied  him  to  Rome.  (Acts  xxviii. 
16,  '■'we  entered  into  Rome.")  He  was  with  the  apostle  when  Colossians 
was  written,  and  sent  a  salutation  to  that  city.  (Colossians  iv.  14.)  There 
is  no  salutation  from  him  to  the  Philippians,  among  whom  he  was  well 
known.  (Acts  xvi.  11  ff.)  Nor  does  Demas  appear  as  in  Colossians  iv.  14. 
(3)  Some  time  is  required  for  the  journeys  between  Rome  and  Philippi, 
implied  by  the  letter.  (4)  Greater  severity  of  treatment  is  apparent,  St. 
Paul  had  enjoyed  comparative  liberty ;  now  he  is  hardly  dealt  with. 
(5)  It  would  seem  that  the  apostle's  case  has  reached  a  crisis.  He 
proposes  to  send  Timothy  shortly,  as  soon  as  he  knows  what  the  decision 
IS  to  be  (ii.  23).  He  is  ready  for  death  if  that  should  be  the  issue,  and 
even  desirous  of  it  on  his  own  account  (i.  23).  But  he  expects  to  be  set 
free  (i.  25  ;  ii.  24).  Whatever  might  be  the  result,  it  would  not  be  to  leave 
him  still  in  prison,  as  Colossians  and  Ephesians  and  Philemon  allow. 
Therefore  those  epistles  must  precede  Philippians.^ 

e.  Integrity, — It  has  been  suggested  that  we  have  two 
writings  of  the  apostle  run  together,  because  half-way  through 
our  epistle  we  find  St.  Paul  drawing  to  a  close  with  the 
formula,  "Finally,  my  brethren,"  etc.  (iii.  i).  But  (i)  the 
apostle  might  have  intended  to  close  here,  and  then  fresh 
ideas  have  started  him  on  a  fresh  course.  He  often  writes 
without  any  evident  scheme,  spontaneously,  setting  down  his 
thoughts  as  they  occur.  (2)  Possibly,  however,  we  should 
not  translate  the  Greek  phrase  (rb  Aoittov)  as  "finally,"  but 
understand  it  as  meaning  "for  the  rest,"  as  dismissing  one 
topic,  and  proceeding  to  others.  So  it  may  have  been  used 
elsewhere  {e.g.^  2  Thessalonians  iii.  i).  The  tone  and  character 
of  the  epistle  are  remarkably  harmonious  throughout,  and 
testify  to  its  being  a  single  work. 

*  For  arguments  in  favour  of  the  earlier  date  see  Lightfoot,  Phil.^ 
Essay  II.,  "The  order  of  the  Epistles  of  the  Captivity."  In  Zahn's 
Einleitung  the  arguments  for  the  later  date  are  maintained. 


PHILIPPIANS  403 

f.   Contents. 

i.  I,  2,  Salutations  from  Paul  and  Timothy  to  the  Christians 
at  Philippi  (as  usual,  denominated  "Saints,"  ayiot)  together 
with  the  bishops  and  deacons. 

This  is  the  first  mention  of  "bishops"  and  "deacons"  in  St.  Paul's 
epistles,  and  the  first  mention  of  them  in  N.T.  history.^  We  do  not 
meet  with  the  titles  in  any  other  place  in  his  writings  till  we  come  to 
the  pastoral  epistles,  where  their  qualifications  are  discussed.  Here  they 
are  only  named.  In  earlier  epistles  we  have  had  vague  allusions  to  church 
officers  {e.g.,  1  Thessalonians  v.  12,  13)  without  any  titles.  Where  ofiicial 
titles  are  referred  to,  they  are  different  from  these,  e.g.,  "apostles,  prophets, 
teachers,"  etc.  (i  Corinthians  xii.  28) ;  or  gifts  and  corresponding  functions 
rather  than  offices  are  named  {e.g. ,  Romans  xii.  6-8). 

3-1 1,  Thanksgiving  for  the  kindness  shown  by  the 
Philippians  to  the  apostle,  and  prayer  for  a  blessing  on 
them. 

12-26,  Statements  about  his  condition.  The  imprisonment 
has  helped  in  furthering  the  gospel  throughout  the  whole 
praetorian  guard.  The  apostle  expects  a  favourable  issue  to 
his  trial.  Yet  he  does  not  desire  this  on  his  own  account,  his 
hfe  being  devoted  to  Christ ;  and  death  would  be  gain  to  him. 

27-30,  Exhortation  to  fidelity  and  courage  under  persecu- 
tion. 

ii.  1-5,  Affectionate  entreaty  to  unselfish  humility. 

6-1 1,  The  example  of  Christ,  who  emptied  Himself, 
became  a  man,  and  was  obedient  unto  death,  for  which 
reason  God  has  highly  exalted  Him. 

12-18,  Exhortation  to  Christian  progress,  since  God  works 
in  us ;  and  warning  against  disputes,  that  the  apostle  may  not 
have  laboured  in  vain. 

19-30,  Timothy  to  be  sent;  Epaphroditus,  who  had  been 
very  ill,  now  sent  back. 

iii.   1-6,  Warning  against  Jewish  influences,  followed  by 

^  Acts,  though  probably  written  later,  refers  to  "elders"  in  an  earlier 

Eeriod  of  the  history  as  in  Jerusalem  (Acts  xi.  30),  and  as  even  appointed 
y  Paul  and  Barnabas  during  the  "first  missionary  journey."  (Acts 
xiv.  23.)  That  book  does  not  name  "deacons,"  though  it  describes 
the  appointment  of  "the  seven."  (Acts  vi.  1-6.)  James,  which  may 
be  the  earliest  epistle,  mentions  elders  (v,  14).  The  title  does  not 
appear  in  Paul  before  the  pastoral  epistles. 


404  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

an  enumeration  of  St.  Paul's  own  Jewish  privileges  and 
attainments. 

7-1 1,  What  he  had  counted  profitable  in  these  things  given 
up  for  the  sake  of  Christ. 

12-16,  The  apostle's  eagerness  to  press  forward  to  higher 
attainments. 

17-iv.  I,  Warning  from  the  example  of  fallen  brethren; 
a  reminder  of  the  heavenly  citizenship  and  of  the  hope 
of  the  coming  of  Christ;  a  consequent  exhortation  to 
steadfastness. 

iv.  2,  3,  Messages  urging  harmony  between  Euodia  and 
Syntyche,  and  suggesting  encouragement  from  one  addressed 
as  "  true  yokefellow  "  for  them  and  Clement. 

4-7,  Exhortations  to  rejoicing  and  prayer,  with  a  benediction 
of  peace. 

8,  9,  Topics  worthy  to  be  thought  of;  and  the  apostle's 
teaching  to  be  followed. 

10-20,  Thanks  for  the  gift  brought  by  Epaphroditus,  which 
is  valued  chiefly  as  a  token  of  affection.  The  apostle  has 
learnt  to  be  independent  of  want  or  plenty. 

21,  22,  Final  salutations. 

23,  Benediction. 

5.  Characteristics  of  the  Group. 

The  ideas  set  forth  in  these  epistles  of  the  third  group 
correspond  to  the  changes  that  have  taken  place  both  in 
the  apostle's  environment  and  in  the  history  of  the  churches. 
The  sharp  conflict  with  Judaising  Christians  that  marked  the 
second  period  of  literary  activity  has  subsided,  and  St.  Paul 
has  the  satisfaction  of  seeing  his  larger  gospel  accepted  in 
the  churches  under  his  charge.  At  the  same  time  the  personal 
opposition  to  the  apostle  which  was  one  phase  of  that  conflict 
has  also  disappeared.  Accordingly  he  no  longer  needs  to 
maintain  his  principles  in  the  same  polemical  style,  nor 
to  assert  his  own  apostolic  claims  as  in  the  controversial 
epistles.  But  new  troubles  have  emerged  in  the  churches  of 
Asia  through  the  introduction  of  ascetic  practices  and  specula- 


CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE  GROUP    405 

tions  of  Jewish  origin,  but  not  associated  with  pharisaic 
legalism.  To  meet  the  practical  tendencies  the  apostle 
denounces  formal,  superstitious  restraints.  But  he  has  a 
greater  aim  in  the  more  spiritual  region.  This  is  to  set 
against  the  novel  speculations  a  very  exalted  idea  of  the 
nature  and  work  of  Jesus  Christ.  Thus  these  epistles  see 
a  development  of  Christology.  In  Colossians  we  advance 
from  the  earlier  association  of  Christ  with  the  universe  as 
the  medium  of  creation  to  a  fuller  idea  of  His  eternal 
connection  with  it  in  sustaining  it,  and  see  its  end  in 
Him.  In  Ephesians,  while  His  relation  to  nature  is  also 
affirmed,  we  see  His  headship  over  the  Church  more 
developed,  and  the  unity  of  the  Church  in  Him  affirmed 
and  illustrated.  Philippians  is  addressed  to  Christians  in 
Macedonia,  who  were  not  affected  by  the  movements  of 
thought  in  the  Lycus  Valley.  But  still  Christ  is  central 
in  the  epistle.  Here  we  have  the  locus  classicus  for  the 
doctrine  of  the  kenosis^  with  its  issue  in  the  supreme 
exaltation  of  Christ  who  has  received  a  name  above  every 
name,  and  to  whom  every  knee  shall  bow,  in  heaven  as 
well  as  on  earth.  In  all  these  epistles  the  mystical  union 
of  the  Christian  with  Christ  becomes  more  prominent 
than  the  forensic  relationship  dwelt  on  in  the  epistles  of 
the  Judaistic  controversy. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

FOURTH    GROUP :    THE    PASTORAL 
EPISTLES 

1.  The  question  of  genuineness.     I       3.  2  Timothy. 

2.  I  Timothy.  |       4.  Titus. 

I.  Genuineness. 

These  three  epistles  are  so  closely  associated,  and  resemble 
one  another  in  so  many  respects,  that  the  question  of  their 
genuineness  must  be  considered  in  a  common  study  of  them. 
In  point  of  fact  most  critics  either  accept  all  of  them  or  reject 
all  of  them.^  Exception  is  taken  to  the  epistles  almost  entirely 
on  internal  grounds,  for  they  are  well  supported  by  the 
evidence  of  antiquity.  Eusebius  included  them  in  the  N.T. 
books  that  were  universally  accepted. ^  He  therefore  knew  of 
no  doubts  in  the  Catholic  Church.  Then  they  are  named  by 
Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Tertullian,  and  as  usual  we  find 
Irenaeus  the  first  to  name  them.^  Even  earlier  than  this,  i  and 
2  Timothy  are  evidently  quoted  by  Polycarp,  though  not 
named.  They  are  also  found  in  the  Syriac  and  the  Old  Latin 
versions,  and  are  acknowledged  in  the  Muratorian  Fragment, 

Compare  Polycarp,  Phil.  iv.  i  with  i  Tim.  vi.  7,  10 ;  Phil.  xii.  3  with 
I  Tim.  ii.  I,  2 ;  Phil.  v.  2  with  2  Tim.  ii,  11,  12 ;  Phil.  ix.  2  with  2  Tim. 
iv.  10. 

^  Schleiermacher,  with  whom  the  scientific  study  of  the  pastoral  epistles 
commenced,  at  first  threw  doubts  on  i  Tim.  by  regarding  it  as  a  compila- 
tion from  2  Tim.  and  Tit.,  but  it  was  soon  seen  that  the  three  epistles 
stand  or  fall  together  ;  and  Schleiermacher  himself  pointed  out  difficulties 
concerning  2  Tim.  and  Tit. 

'  rb.  Tapa  iraa-tv  o/MoXoyoijfieva.     See  H.E.^  ii.  22 ;  iii.  3. 

'  Irenaeus  names  the  two  to  Timothy  {Adv.  Haer,^  iii.  3.  3),  and  cites 
from  Tit.  as  Paul's  {Adv.  Haer.y  i.  16.  3 ;  iii.  3.  4). 

406 


THE  QUESTION  OF  GENUINENESS    40; 

There  is  one  important  witness  that  must  be  cited  on  the 
other  side.  Marcion  did  not  accept  these  epistles  as  St.  Paul's. 
This  fact  should  not  be  set  aside  so  hastily  as  has  been  fre- 
quently done  by  apologists.  Marcion's  is  the  earliest  extant 
canon  of  St.  Paul's  epistles.  As  a  reformer,  reviving  neglected 
Pauline  doctrine,  this  man  made  it  his  business  to  enforce 
what  he  conceived  to  be  the  teaching  found  in  the  apostle's 
writings.  It  is  quite  possible  that  it  was  Marcion  who  first 
made  any  collection  of  the  scattered  letters.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  must  be  observed  that  he  was  possessed  by  a  strong 
doctrinal  bias.  It  was  on  doctrinal  and  not  critical  grounds 
that  he  rejected  all  the  gospels  except  Luke,  and  mutilated 
that,  and  that  he  received  no  other  part  of  the  N.T.  but  St. 
Paul's  epistles.  Inasmuch  as  the  pastoral  epistles  contain 
statements  which  Marcion  would  not  agree  with,  it  is  quite 
possible  that  it  was  only  on  the  ground  of  those  statements 
that  he  rejected  them. 

E.g,^  the  high  value  set  on  the  O.T.  (2  Tim.  iii.  16),  which  Marcion 
rejected;  opposition  to  docetism  (i  Tim.  ii.  5),  which  Marcion  taught; 
also  opposition  to  asceticism  in  "forbidding  to  marry,  and  commanding  to 
abstain  from  meats  which  God  commanded  to  be  received  with  thankful- 
ness," etc.  (i  Tim.  iv.  3) — Marcionite  precepts. 

There  is  much  in  the  epistles  themselves  that  speaks  for 
their  genuineness.  The  spirit  and  power  of  the  N.T.  are 
here;  we  have  not  yet  reached  that  inferior  condition,  that 
lack  of  verve  and  originahty,  which  marks  the  writings  known 
to  be  of  the  sub-apostolic  age.  They  are  Pauline  in  spirit  too, 
and  they  contain  graphic  touches  of  a  personal  character,  which 
some  who  have  rejected  the  epistles  in  their  completeness 
have  allowed  to  be  genuine  fragments  from  writings  of  the 
apostle.  Renan,  who  does  not  admit  the  authenticity  of  the 
epistles,  accepts  these  fragments  as  historical  data,  with  which 
to  complete  his  story  of  St.  Paul.  Then  the  names  of  com- 
panions compare  well  with  those  of  previous  epistles.  Some 
old  names  reappear  ;  others  are  dropped  out ;  and  in  place  of 
them  some  new  names  appear.  These  are  just  such  changes 
as  might  be  expected  in  the  course  of  a  few  years. 


'408  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Nevertheless,  there  is  a  very  widespread  rejection  of  these 
epistles  by  various  schools  of  criticism. 

As  stated  above,  Schleiermacher  was  the  first  to  raise  doubts  on 
I  Timothy.  Eichhorn  and  de  Wette  followed,  rejecting  all  three  in  their 
Introductions.  The  dispute  first  turned  on  the  question  whether  the 
epistles  were  written  by  St.  Paul  himself,  or  by  one  of  his  disciples, 
perhaps  St.  Luke.  A  new  position  was  taken  by  Baur,  who  held  that 
these  epistles  were  written  about  A.D.  150  to  combat  gnosticism,  especially 
that  of  Marcion.^  Baur's  view  somewhat  modified  was  adopted  by  his 
followers,  Schwegler  and  Hilgenfeld  ;  Pfleiderer  and  Weizsacker  advocate 
the  essential  position,  which  is  also  admitted  by  Beyschlag,  but  the  latter 
critics  do  not  admit  Baur's  late  date,  and  recede  to  the  times  of  Trajan  and 
Hadrian.  Of  course,  this  gives  up  the  reference  to  Marcion,  who  is  of  later 
date.  Holtzmann,  who  has  shown  that  the  great  gnostic  systems  of  the 
second  century  are  not  here  referred  to,  still  rejects  the  epistles,  and  so  do 
Harnack  and  Jiilicher.  They  are  defended  by  Zahn  and  by  most  English 
writers  on  N.T.  introduction,  though  rejected  by  Davidson. 

The  following  difficulties  and  objections  have  been  raised : — 

a.  Historical  Difficulties. — No  place  for  these  epistles  can 

be   found  in  St.  Paul's  life,  neither  according  to  Acts,  nor 

according  to  the  other  epistles.     In  i  Timothy  i.  3  we  find 

the  apostle  had  left  Timothy  at  Ephesus  when  going  himself 

to  Macedonia.     This  could  not  be  at  the  conclusion  of  his 

long  residence  at  Ephesus,  which  terminated  with  the  riot 

in  the  theatre,  because  then  he  sent  Timothy  into  Macedonia 

first,  and  followed  later.  (Acts  xix.  22;  xx.  i.)     It  could  not 

be   previous   to    the  period    of  residence,    because    at    that 

early  time   the  church  would   not  have   been  so  advanced 

as   I   Timothy  suggests,   and    the  errors  described    in   the 

epistle  would  not  have  had  time  to  creep  in.     This  epistle 

clearly   shows   that   the    church    at    Ephesus   had    been    in 

existence  for  some  considerable  time  when  it  was  written. 

Moreover    St.    Paul    had    exhorted    Timothy    to    "tarry    at 

Ephesus"  (i   Timothy  i.  3),  and  he  expected  to  return  to 

Timothy  at   Ephesus   (iii.    14),  though   if  he  were   delayed 

Timothy  would  understand  the   reason  (iii.    15).     But  after 

St.  Paul  had  gone  to   Macedonia  from   Ephesus,  Timothy 

was  with   him   (2    Corinthians   i.    i),  so  he   was   in   Greece 

^  Baur  even  took  the  a.vTiQtan.%  of  i  Tim.  vi.  20,  to  refer  to  Marcion's 
work,  ''Antitheses,"  and  the  vofji,o5i.Sd(rKa\oi  of  I  Tim.  i.  7,  and  /idxat 
voixiKai  of  Tit  iii.  9  to  the  Marcionites  and  their  opposition  to  the  O.T. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  GENUINENESS     409 

before  the  apostle  could  return  to  Asia.  (Acts  xx.  4.)  We 
cannot  place  the  journey  referred  to  in  i  Timothy  any  time 
during  the  three  years'  stay  at  Ephesus,  as  a  sort  of  flying 
visit  to  Macedonia,  not  noticed  in  Acts,  because  i  Timothy 
implies  a  long  absence,  during  which  Timothy  has  to  carry 
on  a  continuous  work  in  correcting  false  doctrine,  etc.  Surely 
St.  Paul  would  do  this  himself,  if  it  were  during  the  period  of 
his  residence  at  Ephesus.  Similar  difficulties  apply  to  2  Timo- 
thy. There  we  read,  "Trophimus  I  left  at  Miletus  sick" 
(iv.  20).  This  could  not  be  on  the  journey  to  Jerusalem 
described  in  Acts  xx.  (see  verse  17),  because  we  find 
Trophimus  with  the  apostle  when  he  had  reached  that  city. 
(Acts  xxi.  29.)  After  this  St.  Paul  was  a  prisoner.  But  we 
cannot  think  of  some  earlier  journey,  for  the  apostle  writes 
as  a  prisoner  at  Rome  (2  Timothy  i.  17),  and  his  language 
about  Trophimus  must  refer  to  his  last  visit  to  Miletus. 
It  is  the  same  with  other  personal  references,  e.g.j  "Erastus 
abode  at  Corinth"  (iv.  20).  When?  He  had  not  been  to 
Corinth  for  some  years  before  the  journey  to  Rome  recorded 
in  Acts;  two  years  had  been  spent  at  Csesarea,  and  since 
his  last  visit  to  Corinth  Timothy  had  been  with  him 
(Acts  XX.  4);  so  that  he  would  not  need  now  to  write  to 
Timothy  about  what  had  happened  then.  "The  cloke 
that  I  left  at  Troas,"  etc.  (2  Timothy  iv.  13) — this  must  be 
recent.  Yet  the  only  occasion  Acts  allows  is  seven  or  eight 
years  before.  (Acts  xx.  5-7.)  "  I  have  sent  Tychicus  to  Ephe- 
sus." (2  Timothy  iv.  12.)  This  could  not  be  the  journey  from 
Rome  to  take  the  Colossian  and  Ephesian  Epistles  because 
Timothy  was  then  with  the  apostle.  (Colossians  i.  i.) 

Difficulties  also  come  out  of  the  historical  situation  of  the 
Epistle  to  Titus.  There  we  see  Titus  left  by  St.  Paul  in 
Crete.  (Titus  i.  5.)  He  is  to  join  the  apostle  in  Nicopolis 
(iii.  12).  Acts  allows  no  opportunity  for  such  movements. 
The  condition  of  Crete  and  the  reference  to  Apollos 
(iii.  13)  put  this  later  than  St.  Paul's  stay  at  Corinth. 
(Acts  xviii.)  Yet  a  considerable  time  in  Greece  is  here 
implied. 


410  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

The  only  possible  reconciliation  is  to  place  all  three  epistles 

later  than  the  history  in  Acts.     This  is  on  the  hypothesis  that 

St.  Paul  was  liberated  after  his  trial,  travelled  as  these  epistles 

indicate,  was  again  arrested,  and  again  sent  to  Rome.     Now 

there  are  several  points  in  favour  of  this  hypothesis.    Professor 

Ramsay  has  pointed  out  that  the  attitude  of  the   Roman 

government  to  St.  Paul  and  the  Christians  and  also  the  state 

of    the   law   would   have   issued  in   an   acquittal.     St.    Paul 

had  appealed  to   Caesar,  knowing  his   innocence  in  regard 

to   the    law ;    and   as   yet    the   government   had   not   gone 

against  the   Christians.^    The  apostle  expected  to  gain  his 

case,  and  be  set  free,  as  both  Philippians^  and  Philemon  ^ 

imply.     Very  different  is  his  feeling  when  writing  2  Timothy. 

Then  he  is  assured  of  approaching  martyrdom.^     Moreover 

there  was  an  impression  in  the  early  church  that  the  apostle 

was  liberated,  and  subsequently  imprisoned  again  when  he 

suffered  martyrdom  at  Rome. 

Jerome  is  the  first  to  assert  this  positively.  Eusebius  knows  of  the 
tradition,  though  with  his  usual  accuracy  he  is  cautious  not  to  be  too 
positive  about  it,  writing,  "he  [St.  Paul]  is  said  to  have  departed  again 
on  the  ministry  of  preaching."  {H.E.  ii.  22.)  In  the  Muratorian  Frag- 
ment St.  Paul  is  said  to  have  gone  to  Spain,  which  could  only  have  been 
later  than  the  history  in  Acts.  Clement  of  Rome  says  that  he  went  to 
"the  boundary  of  the  west,"'  a  phrase  which  written  in  Rome  seems 
to  point  to  Spain. 

If  we  admit  this  hypothesis,  all  historical  difficulties  vanish. 
Everything  referred  to  in  the  pastoral  epistles  could  have 
occurred  between  the  two  imprisonments  and  during  the 
second  of  them. 

b.  Fersotial  Difficulties. — St.  Paul  seems  to  protest  his 
apostleship  in   a   manner   that   would  be   superfluous   when 

1  The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire,  pp.  245  ff.  ;  St.  Paul,  etc., 
p.  308. 

'  In  Phil.  ii.  19.  He  anticipates  being  saved,  and  attributes  this 
prospect  to  his  friends'  prayers.  Though  ready  to  die,  he  knows  he 
"shall  abide"  (i.  25).     He  trusts  he  will  soon  come  to  Philippi  (ii.  24). 

^  Requesting  Philemon  to  prepare  him  a  lodging.  (Phile.  22). 

*  He  has  "fought  the  good  fight,"  and  "finished  the  course." 
Henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  him  "the  crown  of  righteousness." 
(2  Tim.  iv.  8.) 

®  iirl  rb  repfM  tjjs  dvaeus.  Clem.  R. ,  I  Cor,  v.  7, 


THE  QUESTION  OF  GENUINENESS     411 

writing  to  such  friends  and  personal  followers  as  Timothy 
and  Titus.^  It  may  be  replied  that  though  addressed  to  these 
two,  the  epistles  were  not  wholly  personal  in  character,  and 
were  intended  for  public  use,  or  at  all  events  to  be  appealed 
to  as  authorities  when  necessary.  Then  the  references  to 
Timothy's  "youth"  (i  Timothy  iv.  12;  2  Timothy  ii.  22) 
seem  strange  after  years  of  public  service.  First  meeting  St. 
Paul  about  a.d.  51  (Acts  xvi.  i),  he  would  have  known  him 
for  some  thirteen  years  if  i  Timothy  were  written  some  time 
after  the  two  years  in  Rome — say  about  a.d.  64,  and  2  Timo- 
thy is  even  later.  Still  he  might  be  of  a  shrinking  nature, 
and  younger  looking  than  his  years,  a  fact  perhaps  humor- 
ously alluded  to  by  the  apostle.  Besides,  the  master  is  apt  to 
forget  the  growing  age  of  his  pupil. 

c.  References  to  Heresies. — It  has  been  said  that  these 
epistles  contain  references  to  second  century  heresies,  in 
particular  to  the  gnosticism  of  Marcion.  Some  "gnosis 
falsely  so  called  "  ^  is  in  the  writer's  mind,  and  Timothy  is 
warned  to  prevent  the  teaching  of  a  "  different  doctrine  "  from 
"the  gospel"  dealing  with  "fables  and  endless  genealogies" 
(i  Timothy  i.  4).  It  has  been  suggested  that  the  gnostic  ideas 
of  the  evolution  of  creation  are  here  referred  to.  But  no  such 
allusions  can  be  proved.  The  heresy  is  plainly  Jewish  ascetic, 
possibly  associated  with  Essene  mysticism;  and  the  genealogies 
are  most  naturally  understood  to  be  those  found  in  Genesis 
interpreted  allegorically.^ 

That  the  tendency  is  Jewish  is  shown  by  allusions  to  '*  teachers  of  the 
law  "  (I  Tim.  i.  7),'* circumcision"  (Tit.  I  10),  "Jewish  fables'"*  (Tit.  i.  14). 
At  the  same  time  it  is  ascetic,  reminding  us  of  the  Essenes  rather  than  of 
the  Pharisees.^ 

*  See  I  Tim.  i.  i  ;  2  Tim.  i.  i  ;  Tit.  i.  i,  2. 

*  rpev8tl)uvfjt.oi  yvC)(XL%,  I  Tim.  vi.  20. 

'  Philo  applied  the  term  "genealogies"  to  the  first  part  of  Genesis. 
Greek  writers  use  it  of  early  mythological  history,  e.g.y  Polyb.  ix.  2. 

^  Compare  this  with  the  '*  fables  and  endless  genealogies  "  of  i  Tim. 
I  4,  which  seem  thus  to  be  just  the  Jewish  Haggada  and  fanciful  specula- 
tions. 

«>  See  I  Tim.  iv.  3,  8  ;  Tit.  i.  14,  15.  But  Dr.  Hort  doubts  whether 
there  is  any  direct  Essene  influence.  Still  he  regards  the  heresy  as  Jewish. 
Judaistic  Christianity ^  chap.  vii.     Von  Soden  in  the  Hand-Coin,  denies 


412  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

d.  Church  Development, — It  is  said  that  the  conditions  of 
church  organisation  apparent  in  these  epistles  point  to  a  later 
historical  period  than  that  of  St.  Paul's  lifetime.  Titus  was 
left  in  Crete  to  appoint  elders  in  every  city.  (Titus  i.  5.) 
The  character  of  the  bishop  is  discussed  both  with  Timothy 
(i  Timothy  iii.  1-7)  and  with  Titus  (Titus  i.  6-9),  and  that  of 
the  deacon  with  Timothy,  (i  Timothy  iii.  8-13.)  Now  it 
cannot  be  denied  that  our  attention  is  here  given  to  church 
officers  in  a  way  we  do  not  meet  with  earlier  in  St.  Paul's 
epistles.  But  it  must  be  observed  that  little  is  said  about 
them  beyond  what  concerns  their  characters.  We  are  left  in 
the  dark  as  to  their  functions.  Then  if  the  elder  is  not 
identical  with  the  bishop  in  every  case,  still  the  bishop 
appears  as  one  of  the  elders.^  In  the  case  of  the  elders 
there  is  no  sharp  distinction  between  officers  of  the  church 
and  senior  Christians,^  and  the  widows  are  described  im- 
mediately after  a  reference  to  the  elders,  indicating  a  certain 
indefiniteness  and  quite  primitive  character  in  the  church 
relations  of  these  people.  There  is  no  sign  here  of  the 
monarchical  episcopacy  advocated  by  Ignatius  early  in  the 
second  century.  Then,  on  the  supposition  of  a  second 
imprisonment  these  epistles  come  in  any  case  some  years 
later  than  any  of  the  previous  ones,  the  last  of  which  refers 
to  "  bishops  and  deacons."  (Philippians  i.  i.)  Besides,  some 
churches  might  develop  organisation  more  rapidly  than 
others. 

e.  Un-Pauline  Features. — We  are  struck  with  a  certain 
harshness,  as  in  the  judgment  of  the  Cretans  (Titus  i.  12,  13), 

any  reference  to  Montanist,  Valentinian,  or  Marcionite  ideas.  Pfleiderer 
argues  that  the  second  century  gnostic  systems  are  referred  to  because 
Irenaeus  finds  answers  to  them  in  the  pastoral  epistles.  But  have  not 
church  writers  in  all  ages  appealed  to  the  N.T.  for  answers  to  their 
contemporary  opponents?  Weiss  fully  discusses  and  disposes  of  these 
references  in  the  new  edition  of  Meyer's  Com. 

1  Timothy  is  to  "appoint  elders"  of  a  certain  character,  "for  the 
bishop  must  be  blameless."  (i  Tim.  i.  5,  7.)  Some  have  maintained  that 
the  word  "bishop"  is  not  official,  and  only  means  "he  who  has  the  over- 
sight." 

"^  e.g. ,  * '  Rebuke  not  an  elder,  but  exhort  him  as  a  father ;  the  younger 
men  as  brethren."  (i  Tim.  v.  i.) 


THE  QUESTION  OF  GENUINENESS     413 

and  in  the  reference  to  Alexander  the  coppersmith.  (2  Timothy 

iv.  14.)     On  the  other  hand  the  universaHty  of  grace  is  said 

to  be  un-PauUne.     God  is  called  "the  Saviour  of  all  men." 

(i  Timothy  iv.  10.)^     The  phrase  is  peculiar,  but  the  idea 

agrees  with  the  evangelical  temper  of  the  apostle.     Then  the 

repeated  references  to  "a  faithful  word,"  "a  faithful  saying," 

seem  to  refer  to  a  later  time  when  memories  of  past  teachings 

were  to  be  cherished.     In  one  place  we  read  what  seems  very 

like  a  confession  of  faith,  consisting  of  several  articles,  and 

apparently  introduced  without   its   commencing  words.^     In 

another,  a  saying  of  Christ  seems  to  be  quoted  as  Scripture. 

But  this  is  not  certain. ^     It  must  be  admitted  that  if  the 

doctrinal  statements  are  not  beyond  what  might  have  come 

from  St.  Paul,  still  these  latter  points  are  not  easily  reconciled 

with  so  early  a  date  as  about  a.d.  65. 

f.    Un-Paiiline    Lartguage    and  Style. — This    is   the    most 

serious  difficulty  of  all.     Not  a  few  critics  who  have  admitted 

possible  replies  to  all  the  earlier  objections  have  thought  this 

last  one  insuperable.     A  great  number  of  peculiar  words  and 

phrases  unknown   to  earlier  PauHne  epistles  appear  in   the 

pastoral  epistles. 

Some  of  these  are  not  to  be  accounted  for  by  novelty  of  topic.  They 
represent  a  different — and  a  more  classical — vocabulary.  We  also  meet 
with  favourite  words  and  phrases  in  these  epistles,  specially  characteristic 
of  them,  such  as  evo-ipeia,  Tnarbs  6  \6yos,  vytrji  and  vyiaiveip  with  reference 
to  correct  teaching,  fiijdoi,,  ^rp-ria-eis,  iirKpaveia  for  the  Second  Advent  instead 
of  irapova-ia,  deffirdTijs  instead  of  Kipios,  aoiT-fip  applied  to  God,  dpveiadaif 
irapaiTeladai,  irepua-Tdvai  to  avoid,  irpoaex^iv  with  the  dative,  VTrofxi.fxvii(TK€iVf 
etc.  On  the  other  hand  we  miss  St.  Paul's  favourite  particles,  such  as  &pa, 
8i6ti,  and  other  favourite  words  of  his,  such  as  Kavxaofiai  (but  this  is  not 

^  Similar  expressions  are  in  i  Tim.  ii.  3-6;  Tit.  ii.  Ii. 

*  '  *  Great  is  the  mystery  of  Godliness — wAo  was  manifest  in  the  flesh, 
justified  in  the  spirit,  etc."  (l  Tim.  iii.  16),  where  the  masculine  relative 
seems  to  require  a  corresponding  antecedent — probably  some  name  for  our 
Lord. 

^  **  The  Scripture  saith,  Thou  shalt  not  muzzle  the  ox  when  he  treadeth 
out  the  com.  And,  The  labourer  is  worthy  of  his  hire."  (i  Tim.  v.  18.) 
The  first  of  these  sentences  is  in  Deut,  xxv.  4 ;  but  the  second  is  only  to 
be  found  as  a  saying  of  Jesus  Christ  in  Luke  x.  7.  The  objection  goes  too 
far.  Sayings  of  Christ  are  not  quoted  even  in  the  second  century  merely 
as  "Scripture,"  without  reference  to  His  name.  Probably  the  word 
Scripture  here  only  refers  to  the  first  quotation. 


414  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

found  in  Colossians  or  Philippians),  T€pia<re6u  (but  this  is  not  found  in 
Galatians,  which  is  undoubtedly  St.  Paul's).  We  also  miss  St.  Paul's 
broken  sentences.  The  style  is  smooth.  It  is  possible  to  reply  here  as 
in  the  case  of  the  third  group.  Time  has  elapsed,  and  brought  with  it 
changes  affecting  the  mind  of  the  writer. 

The  argument  is  cumulative,  and  it  can  only  be  appreciated 
where  it  is  gone  into  fuUy.^ 

When  these  considerations  are  taken  together,  though  some 
of  them  can  be  quite  explained,  it  is  clear  that  we  have 
difficulties  besetting  these  three  epistles  that  apply  to  no  others. 
Nevertheless  the  alternative  must  be  faced.  If  the  pastoral 
epistles  were  not  written  by  St.  Paul,  they  were  intended  to 
be  passed  off  as  his.  Why  then  should  the  writer  of  them 
manufacture  difficulties  for  himself?  This  is  not  like  the 
case  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  which  does  not  claim 
to  be  written  by  St  Paul.  The  great  weight  of  critical 
opinion  which  is  against  the  Pauline  authorship  justifies  us 
in  exercising  some  caution  in  regard  to  this  question.  We 
cannot  positively  assert  the  genuineness  of  the  epistles.  Still 
the  evidence  in  favour  of  them  is  so  strong,  and  so  many 
of  the  objections  can  be  met,  that  we  cannot  deny  them  to  be 
genuine,  and  it  seems  not  unreasonable  to  regard  them  as  St. 
Paul's,  perhaps  with  more  scope  allowed  to  the  amanuensis.^ 

2.  1  Timothy. 

a.  Timothy, — We  learn  from  Acts  xvi.  i  that  Timothy  was 
the  son  of  a  Greek-speaking  Gentile  father  and  a  Jewess 
mother  at  Derbe  or  Lystra  in  Lycaonia.  Trained  in  the 
scriptures  by  his  mother,  who  was  named  Eunice,  and  his 
grandmother  Lois  (2  Timothy  i.  5),  he  was  one  of  the 
converts  won  by  St.  Paul  when  the  apostle  accompanied 
Barnabas  on  what  we  call  the  first  missionary  journey. 
Probably  he  was  but  a  boy  at  this  time,  but  those  who 
were  gifted  with  prophetic  insight  in  the  church  pointed 
him  out  as  destined  for  missionary  work,  (i  Timothy  i.  18; 

1  See  Davidson,  Introd.,  "The  Pastoral  Epistles,"  where  a  full  list 
of  words  peculiar  to  these  epistles  is  given. 

2  The  Pauline  authorship  is  very  fully  discussed  and  defended  in 
Zahn's  EinUitungt  Vol.  I.,  pp.  39S-489. 


I   TIMOTHY  415 

iv.  14.)  The  elders  solemnly  set  him  apart  for  this  work 
{ibid.),  and  on  St.  Paul's  return  to  the  district,  some  six 
or  seven  years  after  his  first  visit,  the  apostle  chose  him 
as  a  colleague  in  the  ministry,  according  to  Acts  first  having 
him  circumcised,  no  doubt  that  he  might  be  able  to  work 
among  Jews  as  well  as  Gentiles.  (Acts  xvi.  3.)  Henceforth 
we  find  him  most  frequently  associated  with  the  apostle  both 
in  travel  and  in  the  writing  of  epistles,  of  some  of  which 
perhaps  he  was  the  amanuensis.^  He  was  with  St.  Paul 
during  the  first  imprisonment  at  Rome,  and  the  pastoral 
epistles  indicate  that  he  was  the  apostle's  travelling  companion 
again  after  the  release. 

b.  Occasion,  Place,  and  Date  of  Writing. — St.  Paul  had  been 
recently  at  Ephesus,  and  had  been  called  away  to  Macedonia, 
leaving  Timothy  in  charge  of  his  work  there  (i.  3).  He  had 
intended  to  return  before  long ;  but  he  had  been  unexpectedly 
delayed  (iii.  14,  15).  This  delay  led  him  to  send  directions 
to  Timothy.  These  are  concerned  partly  with  doctrine,  for 
the  prevention  of  the  spread  of  a  false  teaching  that  is 
threatening  the  church,  and  partly  with  administrative  affairs, 
the  appointment  of  church  officers,  and  the  sort  of  persons 
who  should  be  chosen.  Timothy  seems  to  need  rousing  and 
encouraging  (iv.  12-15).  The  apostle  appears  to  be  now  in 
Macedonia.  This  must  be  some  time  after  the  first  imprison- 
ment, i.e.,  after  a.d.  62,  perhaps  about  a.d.  64. 

c.  Contents, 

i.  I,  2,  Salutation. 

3-7,  Timothy  left  at  Ephesus  to  counteract  false  teaching 
about  the  law. 

8-1 1,  The  true  use  of  the  law,  which  is  not  for  the  righteous, 
but  for  sinners. 

12-17,  Paul's  conversion  gratefully  acknowledged. 

18-20,  Timothy  charged  to  be  faithful,  and  warned  from  two 
examples  of  apostasy. 

^  His  name  occurs  among  the  messengers  of  the  salutation  in  Rom. 
xvi.  21,  and  united  to  the  apostle's  name  as  a  joint  sender  of  six 
letters.  (2  Cor.  i.  i ;  Phil.  i.  i ;  Col.  i.  I ;  I  Thess.  i.  i ;  2  Thess. 
i.  I  ;  Phile.  i.) 


4i6  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

ii.  1-7,  Prayer  for  all  men,  since  God  wills  all  to  be  saved 
through  the  One  Mediator. 

8-15,  Conduct  of  men  in  worship,  and  decorous  behaviour 
of  women. 

iii.  1-7,  The  character  for  a  bishop. 

8-13,  The  character  for  deacons. 

14,  15,  Expecting  to  come  soon  to  Timothy,  the  apostle 
charges  him  to  direct  the  church. 

16,  A  confession  of  primary  beliefs  about  Christ 

iv.  1-5,  Ascetics,  forbidding  marriage  and  certain  foods, 
condemned. 

6-16,  Timothy  to  be  a  good  minister,  nourished  by  the 
truth,  not  trusting  in  bodily  exercises,  and  avoiding  foolish 
fables. 

v.  I,  2,  Concerning  rebukes  of  elders,  etc. 

3-16,  Directions  concerning  widows. 

17-25,  Duties  to  elders,  for  their  support,  and  in  charging 
them  with  faults. 

vi.  I,  2,  The  duties  of  servants,  especially  not  to  despise 
believing  masters. 

3-5,  Against  vain  disputations. 

6-10,  The  duty  of  contentment,  and  the  mischief  of  the 
love  of  money. 

11-16,  Timothy  charged  to  be  courageous  in  conflict, 
looking  for  the  manifestation  of  the  Great  King. 

17-19,  A  charge  to  the  rich  against  pride,  to  be  generous, 
and  prize  the  true  riches. 

20,  21,  Final  warning  of  Timothy  against  foolish  and  false 
teachings. 

The  citation  of  what  are  called  "  faithful  sayings  "  is  a  peculiarity  of  the 
pastoral  epistles.^  These  may  be  (i)  utterances  of  the  Christian  prophets, 
or  (2)  phrases  arranged  for  catechetical  teaching,  or  (3)  in  some  cases 
scraps  of  hymns  familiar  from  frequent  repetition.  It  is  not  probable 
that  they  are  Logia  of  Jesus  Christ,  since,  though  some  might  have 
been  spoken  by  our  Lord,  this  could  not  have  been  the  case  with  all  ; 
that  of  I  Timothy  iii.  i,  "  If  a  man  seeketh  the  office  of  a  bishop,  he 
desireth  a  good  work,"  is  certainly  of  late  origin. 

1  Found  in  i  Tim.  i.  15 ;  iii.  I ;  iv.  9 ;  2  Tim.  ii.  u  ;  Titus  iii.  8. 


2   TIMOTHY  417 

3.  2  Timothy. 

a.  Place^  Date^  and  Occasion  of  Writing. — St.  Paul  is 
now  at  Rome  again  (i.  17),  and  a  second  time  a  prisoner, 
the  reason  of  his  imprisonment  being  the  witness  he  has 
borne  to  Christ  (i.  8,  12).  It  would  seem  that  he  had  not 
been  able  to  fulfil  the  wish  expressed  in  i  Timothy,  and 
return  to  Timothy  at  Ephesus,  owing  to  his  arrest  and  re- 
moval to  the  Imperial  City.  This  imprisonment  had  already 
lasted  some  time,  for  news  of  it  had  reached  Ephesus,  and 
the  apostle  had  requested  two  of  his  friends,  Phygellus  and 
Hermogenes,  to  come  to  him  in  Rome,  but  they  had  refused, 
probably  because  of  the  danger  (i.  15).  A  beautiful  exception 
was  that  of  the  Ephesian  Onesiphorus,  who  had  not  been 
ashamed  of  owning  the  prisoner,  and  had  sought  the  apostle 
out  of  his  own  accord.  St.  Paul  does  not  expect  to  escape 
this  time.  His  case  has  already  had  a  first  hearing,  when 
no  witness  appeared  in  his  defence  (iv.  16).  He  is  now  ready 
to  be  offered  up,  assured  that  the  time  of  his  departure  has 
come  (iv.  6).  But  he  has  heard  sad  news  of  Timothy,  who 
is  depressed  and  alarmed  (i.  7,  8).  The  apostle  writes  to 
encourage  him  and  guide  him  in  his  work,  but  with  the 
specific  object  of  asking  him  to  come  to  his  friend  at 
Rome  before  winter  (iv.  21).  This  shows  that  St.  Paul 
does  not  anticipate  an  immediate  execution.  Accepted  as 
a  genuine  epistle  of  St.  Paul,  probably  2  Timothy  should 
not  be  later  than  a.d.  65. 

b.  Contents. 

i.  I,  2,  Salutation. 

3-5,  Thankfulness  for  Timothy's  hereditary  faith. 

6-14,  Exhortation  to  energy  and  courage  in  view  of  the 
holy  calling  in  Christ  Jesus. 

15-18,  The  failing  of  friends  in  Asia,  and  the  fidelity  of 
Onesiphorus  in  visiting  the  apostle  in  prison. 

ii.  1-13,  Exhortation  to  endure  hardship  as  Christ's  soldier 
in  remembrance  of  Him  and  His  resurrection.  They  who  die 
with  Christ  shall  live  with  Him. 

14-19,  Contentions  and  profane  discussions  to  be  shunned 

2    £ 


4l8  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

I  The  instances  of  Hymenseus  and  Philetus,  who  overthrow 
the  faith  of  some  by  asserting  that  the  resurrection  is  past 
already. 

We  have  no  data  for  determining  the  nature  of  this  heresy.  It  is  not 
likely  that  it  was  merely  the  denial  of  a  bodily  resurrection,  as  some  have 
thought,  because  the  expression  "past  already"  would  not  suit  such  an 
idea,  except  for  those  who  were  already  dead,  and  then  not  aptly.  Prob- 
ably the  notion  is  that  the  resurrection  time  for  all  Christians  was  passed, 
and  the  new  age  arrived,  so  that  there  would  be  no  further  development 
to  look  for,  no  Parousia  in  the  future,  and  possibly  no  death.  ^ 

20-26,  Varieties  of  character  like  varieties  of  vessels  in  a 
house.  To  be  as  a  vessel  of  honour,  a  man  should  purge  him- 
self, escaping  from  youthful  desires,  and  avoiding  foolish 
questionings. 

iii.  1-9,  The  coming  mischief-makers,  who  will  creep  into 
houses,  deceiving  foolish  women. 

10-12,  A  reminder  of  the  persecutions  Timothy  had  wit- 
nessed or  heard  of  in  his  own  country. 

13-17,  Finding  instruction  in  Scripture  inspired  by  God 
in  order  to  avoid  impostors. 

iv.  1-6,  A  charge  to  be  faithful  in  the  ministry  of  preaching, 
rebuking,  encouraging,  etc. 

7,  8,  The  apostle's  course  drawing  to  an  end. 

9-15,  Personal  notes;  Timothy  urged  to  come,  since  most 
of  his  companions  have  forsaken  the  apostle. 

16-18,  The  first  hearing  of  the  apostle's  case,  when  no  one 
appeared  in  his  defence. 

19-22,  Final  salutations. 

4.  Titus. 

a.  Titus  the  Evangelist. — All  we  can  know  of  Titus  must 
be  gathered  from  St.  Paul's  epistles,  as  he  is  never  mentioned 
in  Acts.  He  was  a  Gentile  (Galatians  ii.  3),  and  a  convert  of 
St.  Paul's.  (Titus  i.  4.)  We  first  meet  with  him  as  a  com- 
panion of  Paul  and  Barnabas  in  the  visit  to  Jerusalem 
described  in  Galatians  ii.  i-io,  when  he  was  not  compelled 
to  be  circumcised.     He  would  seem  to  have  been  personally 

*  This  is  Von  Soden's  interpretation,  Hand-  Com. ,  in  loc. 


TITUS  419 

known  to  the  Galatians,  perhaps  because,  like  Timothy,  he  was 
a  fellow-countryman.  Subsequently  he  attended  the  apostle 
at  times  during  his  missionary  journeys.  When  difficulties 
arose  in  Corinth  he  was  despatched  thither,  and  he  was  able 
to  report  good  news  on  meeting  his  master  in  Macedonia. 
(2  Corinthians  vii.  6,  7,  13-15.)  He  was  the  bearer  of  2  Corin- 
thians (viii.  6,  16-18).  Then  we  lose  sight  of  him.  After  St. 
Paul's  release  from  his  first  imprisonment,  Titus  was  with  him 
in  Crete,  and  was  left  there  by  the  apostle  to  direct  the  affairs 
of  the  churches.  (Titus  i.  5.) 

b.  Occasion  and  Time  of  Writing  the  Epistle. — Zenas,  a 
former  teacher  of  the  Jewish  law,  and  Apollos,  having  to 
travel  by  way  of  Crete,  St.  Paul,  in  commending  them  to  the 
churches  there  (iii.  13),  seizes  the  opportunity  to  send  a  letter 
of  directions  to  Titus.  A  special  reason  for  writing  is  found 
in  the  invasion  of  the  churches  by  Jews,  mercenary  teachers 
who  seek  to  fascinate  the  Cretans  with  their  "fables" 
(i.  10-14).  The  apostle  indicates  that  the  work  of  Titus  in 
appointing  worthy  and  capable  elders  is  to  counteract  this 
mischievous  influence.  The  situation  compels  a  date  subse- 
quent to  the  history  in  Acts,  and  the  condition  of  the  churches 
suggests  a  late  date.  The  similarity  to  i  Timothy  suggests 
that  the  two  epistles  were  written  at  the  same  time,  i.e.^  about 
A.D.  64.  It  is  impossible  to  say  which  was  written  first.  The 
locality  of  the  apostle  when  writing  cannot  be  determined. 
As  he  expects  to  winter  at  Nicopolis,  probably  the  city  of  that 
name  in  Epirus,  possibly  he  is  writing  from  Greece  or  Mace- 
donia. 

c.  Contents. 

i.  1-4,  Salutation,  with  reminder  of  the  promise  of  eternal 
life. 

5-9,  Titus  left  in  Crete  to  ordain  elders;  the  requisite 
character  for  a  bishop. 

10-16,  Unruly  men,  vain  talkers,  especially  such  as  are 
Jews,  to  be  restrained. 

ii.  i-io,  Duties  of  aged  men  and  women ;  young  women 
and  men ;  servants. 


420  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

11-15,  The  grace  of  God  that  brings  salvation,  and  the 
hope  of  the  appearing  of  Christ. 

iii.  I,  2,  Subjection  to  rulers,  diligence,  kindness,  gentleness, 
etc.,  to  be  commended. 

3-8,  The  kindness  of  God,  delivering  us  from  our  former 
evil  life,  and  saving  us  to  be  heirs  of  eternal  life. 

9-1 1,  Foolish  discussions  to  be  avoided.  How  to  deal 
with  a  factious  person. 

12-14,  When  Artemas  or  Tychicus  are  sent  to  him,  Titus 
is  to  join  the  apostle  at  Nicopolis  for  the  winter.  Zenas  the 
lawyer,  and  Apollos  commended. 

15,  Final  salutation. 

In  i.  12,  St.  Paul  quotes  a  Cretan  "one  of  themselves,  a  prophet  of 
their  own."  The  saying  is  by  Epimenides,  a  native  of  Phcestus  or 
Cnossus  in  Crete,  a  bard  who  was  regarded  as  a  seer.  Plato  calls  him 
Oeios  &vf)p,  and  Cicero  couples  him  with  Bacis,  the  Boeotian  sibyl. ^  But 
the  saying  is  quoted  by  Callimachus,  from  whom  St.  Paul  may  have 
derived  it.  Or  it  may  have  become  a  popular  proverb,  and  thus  known 
to  the  apostle  apart  from  literature.  Still  the  definite  ascription  of  it  to 
its  author  renders  it  more  probable  that  St.  Paul  had  seen  the  line  when 
reading  the  writings  of  its  author. 

There  is  not  much  that  can  be  regarded  as  an  advance  in 
the  apostle's  teaching  to  be  found  in  the  pastoral  epistles. 
These  writings  deal  with  fresh  forms  of  false  teaching,  but 
unlike  Colossians  and  Ephesians,  which  meet  the  error,  and 
counteract  it,  by  the  full  exposition  of  the  truth  which  opposes 
it,  the  pastoral  epistles,  while  describing  and  characterising 
what  the  apostle  objects  to,  do  not  enter  into  any  arguments 
or  make  any  assertions  of  the  contrary  truth.  The  object  is 
rather  to  encourage  and  urge  Timothy  and  Titus  to  resist  the 
mischievous  teaching  by  means  already  familiar  to  them. 
Some  development  of  church  order  is  now  manifest.  The 
appointment  of  elders  is  directly  commanded  in  order  to  keep 
irregularities  out  of  the  churches.  To  this  end  teaching  faculty 
is  a  valuable  qualification  for  the  office.  Deacons  are  also 
now  recognised  as  a  second  order  in  the  churches. 

1  See  Ellicott's  Com.,  in  loc. 


CHAPTER  IX. 
THE   EPISTLE   TO  THE   HEBREWS 


1.  Who  was  the  Author— Paul, 

Luke,     Clement,     Apollos, 
Barnabas  ? 

2.  Date  and  Place  of  Writing. 


3.  The  Church  Addressed. 

4.  Occasion  of  Writing. 

5.  Contents. 

6.  Argument. 


I.  The  Author. 

This  is  a  perfectly  anonymous  work.  Unlike  St.  Paul's 
epistles,  which  begin  with  the  apostle's  name,  it  has  no 
such  commencement ;  nor  does  the  writer  anywhere  indicate 
who  he  is,  for  the  title  in  A.V.  and  R.V.  is  not  part  of  the 
original  text,  and  is  not  found  in  the  older  MSS.  Therefore 
the  question  of  authorship  is  not  one  of  genuineness.  It  has 
been  assigned  to  Paul,  Luke,  Clement  R.,  Apollos,  Barnabas, 
Priscilla. 

a.  St.  Paul. — We  first  meet  with  the  name  of  Paul  in 
connection  with  the  epistle  at  Alexandria  about  the  middle 
of  the  second  century.  This  came  to  be  the  current  idea 
in  the  East  first;  the  West  was  slower  to  accept  the  epistle 
as  a  work  of  the  apostle.  Thus  it  is  ascribed  to  St.  Paul 
by  Pantaenus,  Clement,  and  Origen  in  Alexandria;  by  Paul 
of  Samosata  at  the  Synod  of  Antioch;  by  Eusebius  of 
Caesarea ;  by  the  Council  of  Laodicea  (a.d.  364),  and 
universally  by  the  later  Greek  fathers.  On  the  other  hand, 
in  the  West  we  find  that  Irenaeus,  Hippolytus,  Caius  of  Rome, 
Tertullian,  and  Cyprian  did  not  attribute  it  to  St.  Paul.  It 
was  not  in  the  Canon  of  Marcion,  nor  in  the  Muratorian 
Fragment  as  St.  Paul's.  It  was  not  accepted  in  the  West 
as  a  work  of  the  apostle  till  the  fifth  century,  under  the 
influence  of  Augustine  and  Jerome,  and  the  latter  expressed 
some  hesitation  on  the  subject. 

421 


422  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Pantaenus  of  Alexandria  in  the  middle  of  the  second  century  is  the 
earliest  writer  to  refer  the  authorship  to  St.  Paul.  He  gives  two  reasons 
why  the  apostle  did  not  attach  his  name  to  it:  (i)  That  Christ  was 
the  real  apostle  to  the  Hebrews ;  (2)  that  Paul  was  the  apostle  to  the 
Gentiles,  not  the  Jews.^  Clement  of  Alexandria  follows,  also  ascribing 
it  to  St.  Paul,  and  adding  that  it  was  written  for  the  Hebrews  in  the 
Hebrew  tongue,  and  translated  by  Luke."  The  latter  statements  are 
plainly  incorrect,  as  the  book  is  not  a  translation ;  but  the  fact  that 
Clement  was  led  to  make  them  is  not  without  significance.  It  shows 
that  critical  difficulties  about  the  style  had  been  perceived.  Next  we 
have  Origen,  whose  statements  are  not  entirely  consistent.  In  his 
Homilies  on  Joshua  he  ascribes  fourteen  epistles  to  St.  Paul,^  and  in 
the  epistle  Ad  A/ricanum,  chapter  ix,  he  defends  the  Pauline  authorship 
against  those  who  deny  it.  Such  denial  then  is  to  be  found  even  in  the 
East.  This  is  in  a.d.  240.  Five  years  later  Origen  has  modified  his  posi- 
tion. In  a  homily  dated  A.D.  245,  while  he  states  that  Hebrews  was 
traditionally  ascribed  to  Paul  by  "men  of  old  time,"  he  admits  difficulties 
in  the  style,  and  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  the  thought  was  Paul's,  but 
the  writer  a  disciple  of  Paul's.  He  mentions  traditions  assigning  it  to 
Clement  R.  and  to  Luke,  and  for  his  own  part  declares  "who  wrote 
the  epistle  God  only  knows."*  If  then  we  accept  Origen's  final  judg- 
ment as  representing  his  ripe  opinion,  we  shall  have  to  class  this  im- 
portant and  ancient  scholar  with  those  whotieny  the  Pauline  authorship. 
When  we  turn  to  the  Syrian  Church  we  find  the  epistle  in  the  Peshitto,  as 
in  our  Bibles,  not  with  the  letters  to  the  churches,  but  after  the  letters 
to  individual  men,  which  suggests  that  it  was  added  as  an  appendix 
to  the  Pauline  collection.  Yet  at  the  Synod  of  Antioch  a  letter  of 
Paul  of  Samosata  was  read,  which  quoted  Hebrews  xi.  26  together 
with  sentences  from  i  and  2  Corinthians  as  by  the  same  apostle. 
Eusebius  must  be  cited  on  the  PauUne  side.  He  often  quotes  the 
epistle  as  St.  Paul's,  accepts  fourteen  epistles  of  St.  Paul,°  and  includes 
Hebrews  in  St.  Paul's  "  Homologoumena."'  But  subsequently  he  follows 
Origen  in  holding  that  the  apostle  wrote  it  in  Hebrew,  and  relates  how 
some  say  that  the  evangelist  Luke,  others  that  Clement,  translated  it. 
Eusebius  incHnes  to  accept  Clement  («.<?.,  of  Rome)  as  the  translator.' 
Subsequently  he  seems  to  have  placed  it  among  the  *' Antilegoniena."^ 
The  Council  of  Laodicea  and  the  Fathers  Athanasius,  Basil,  Gregory 
Naz.,  Gregory  Nys.,  Cyril  Jer.,  and  Theodoret,  all  ascribe  it  to  St.  Paul. 
Still  even  Theodoret  mentions  people  of  Arian  sentiments  who  rejected 
Hebrews  as  spurious  {v6do%),  denying  that  Paul  wrote  it.  Thenceforth, 
however,  we  meet  with  no  more  doubts. 

In  the  West  the  case  is  very  different.  Though  quoted  by  Clement  R., 
the  epistle  fell  out  of  notice  in  this  r^ion.     Irenceus,  while  frequently 

1  Eusebius,  H.E.,  vi.  14.  ^  /^^-^^ 

'  "God  thundering  on  the  fourteen  trumpets  of  his" — i.e.^  Paul's — 
**  epistles,  threw  down  even  the  walls  of  Jericho,  that  is,  all  the  in- 
struments of  the  idols  and  the  doctrines  of  the  philosophers."  But 
this  is  only  preserved  in  the  Latin  translation  by  Rufinus,  who  professedly 
"corrects"  Origen. 

*  Eusebius,  H.E,y  vi.  25.  »  H,E.,  iii.  3. 

«  Ibid.^  iii.  25.  '  Ibid.,  iu.  38.  »  Ibid.,  vi.  13. 


THE   AUTHOR  423 

citing  the  Pauline  epistles,  never  cites  Hebrews,  though  it  would  often 
have  helped  his  argument ;  ^  nor  does  Hippolytus  name  it.  Caius  of 
Rome  only  refers  to  thirteen  epistles  of  Paul,  thus  excluding  Hebrews." 
Tertullian  does  not  seem  to  know  that  Hebrews  had  ever  been  attributed 
to  Paul. 3  Cyprian  writes  of  the  seven  churches  to  which  Paul  wrote,^ 
thus  excluding  Hebrews ;  and  he  never  mentions  Hebrews,  and  never 
cites  it.  Not  till  the  fourth  century  do  we  hear  a  whisper  in  the 
West  of  the  Pauline  authorship.  As  far  as  we  know,  the  first  Western 
writer  to  ascribe  Hebrews  to  St.  Paul  is  Hilary  of  Poictiers  (a.d.  368)  ; 
others  follow,  e.g.^  Lucifer,  Ambrose.  Jerome  often  quotes  Hebrews 
as  St.  Paul's.  Yet  he  writes  with  hesitation,  as  when  he  says,  "  If 
anyone  is  willing  to  receive  that  the  epistle  has  been  written  .  .  . 
under  Paul's  name."  ^  He  says  the  Latin  custom  had  not  been  to 
receive  it  among  the  Canonical  epistles.  Augustine  uses  it  as  St.  Paul's, 
and  from  his  time  it  is  acknowledged  as  Pauline  in  the  West  as  well 
as  the  East. 

When  we  turn  to  internal  evidence  we  find  certain  traits 
that  might  indicate  a  Pauline  origin  :  (i)  The  author  writes 
with  weight,  and  as  one  who  has  a  right  to  exhort  his  readers. 
(2)  He  is  a  friend  of  Timothy  (xiii.  23).  (3)  He  refers  to 
"  my  bonds  "  (x.  34).  But  that  is  only  according  to  doubtful 
MS.  authority.^  (4)  He  refers  to  "  those  of  Italy "  (xiii.  24). 
But  this  does  not  imply  that  he  writes  from  Italy.  (5) 
Certain  linguistic  coincidences  have  been  pointed  out. 

Dr.  Salmon  cites  a  number  of  verbal  coincidences.'  Like  St.  Paul 
he  is  found  ringing  the  changes  on  a  word,  e.g.^  on  uTrordcro-w.  (Hebrews 
ii.  8;  conf.  i  Corinthians  xv.  27.)  But  as  to  the  verbal  resemblances 
generally,  it  is  agreed  that  whoever  the  author  was,  he  knew  some  of 
the  apostle's  epistles,  and  borrowed  phrases  from  them. 

(6)  In  the  matter  of  doctrine  the  Pauline  liberalism  is 
assumed. 

^  Eusebius  says  he  mentioned  Hebrews  (H.E.y  v.  26),  but  does  not  say 
he  ascribed  it  to  St.  Paul.  No  passage  in  the  extant  works  of  Irenreus 
can  be  pointed  to  as  supporting  Eusebius's  statement.  Stephen  Gobar 
(sixth  century),  in  a  passage  preserved  by  Photius  Cod.  232,  writes, 
•*  Hippolytus  and  Irenaeus  say  that  the  epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Hebrews 
is  not  his." 

2  Eusebius,  H.E.,  vi.  20. 

^  His  opinion  will  be  considered  with  respect  to  the  Barnabas  theory. 

^  Adv.  Jud.,  i.  20. 

'  Com.  on  Titusy  i.  5 ;  compare  Com.  on  TituSy  ii.  5 ;  Ezek,  xxviii.  1 1 ; 
Amos  viii.  7,  8  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  31. 

^  Sea-fiois  fiov—i^;  Seafxlois — A.D.  vg.,  syrr.,  cop.,  arm. 

'  Introd.y  Lect.  xxi. 


424  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

On  the  other  hand  there  are  insuperable  difficulties  to 
accepting  the  Eastern  tradition  that  St.  Paul  was  the  author. 
The  work  is  not  at  all  like  any  of  St.  Paul's  epistles.  In  its 
form  it  is  much  more  like  a  treatise.  The  Greek  is  purer 
than  that  of  the  apostle.  The  style  is  very  different  from  his. 
St.  Paul  is  vehement  and  abrupt,  given  to  break  off  from  the 
main  topic,  inserting  parentheses,  and  generally  writing  in  the 
free  manner  of  conversation.  But  in  Hebrews  we  have  finished 
phrases;  full,  rounded,  rhetorical  sentences,  and  every  evi- 
dence of  calm  self-possession.  One  clear  distinction  may  be 
noted.  When  quoting  from  the  O.T.  St.  Paul  makes  frequent 
use  of  the  Hebrew  text,  and  corrects  the  LXX.  by  it ;  but  the 
author  of  Hebrews  invariably  quotes  the  LXX.,  and  even 
argues  from  it  where  it  differs  from  the  original.^  More- 
over, his  way  of  introducing  the  O.T.  is  different  from  St. 
Paul's;  for  while  the  apostle  uses  such  phrases  as  "it  is 
written,"  "  the  Scripture  says,"  "  David  says,"  "  Moses  says," 
"  Isaiah  says,"  Hebrews  does  not  cite  under  the  title  "  Scrip- 
ture," or  with  the  authors'  names,  but  attributes  the  utterances 
cited  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  to  God,  except  that  once  he  refers 
to  a  writer  in  a  vague  way,  saying  "  one  hath  somewhere  testi- 
fied "  (ii.  6). 

We  meet  with  a  number  of  phrases  foreign  to  the  Pauline  writings,  e.g.<t 
"the  living  God,"  "the  living  way,"  "the  living  Word,"  full-sounding 
poetical  words  (such  as  /teyaXwo-i/i'T;,  used  twice  for  God,  i.  3  ;  viii.  i). 
Greek  particles  are  more  frequent  than  in  Paul,  especially  7ci/)  and  re  ko.L  * 

Even  more  convincing  is  the  strongly-marked  difference  of 
doctrinal  standpoints.  It  is  not  that  there  is  any  contradiction 
between  Hebrews  and  Paulinism.  But  the  way  of  regarding 
the  Christian  scheme  is  very  different.  With  St.  Paul,  Christi- 
anity is  the  one  saving  faith  for  which  Judaism  is  a  preparation 
by  awakening  conscience  through  the  law,  and  so  demonstrat- 
ing the  need  of  the  gospel ;  but  according  to  Hebrews  Christi- 
anity is  the  new  covenant,  which  contains  in  reality  and 
perfection  what  the  law  had  but  in  shadow,  and  with  inferior 

^  In  the  use  of  LXX.,  Paul  commonly  agrees  with  the  Vatican  MS., 
but  Hebrews  with  the  Alexandrian. 

'  For  a  list  of  verbal  peculiarities  see  Davidson,  Introd.^  Hebrews. 


THE   AUTHOR  425 

merits.  Taking  all  these  facts  into  consideration,  and  noting 
the  great  uncertainty  of  patristic  tradition  on  the  subject,  we 
must  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  epistle  was  not  written 
by  St.  Paul. 

b.  S^.  Luke. — Clement's  and  Origen's  remarks  cited  above  ^ 
raise  the  question  whether  St.  Luke  was  the  author.  This 
view  has  been  maintained  by  DeUtzsch  and  others,  chiefly  on 
the  ground  of  similarity  of  style  and  vocabulary. ^  But  the 
fatal  objection  to  it  is  that  the  author  was  a  Jew,  while  St. 
Luke  was  a  Gentile.^  Besides,  in  the  case  of  such  a  well- 
known  writer  as  the  author  of  the  third  gospel  and  Acts, 
it  is  difficult  to  imagine  how  one  of  his  works  could  thus 
be  detached  from  his  name. 

c.  Cle7nent  of  Rome. — Origen's  suggestion  of  a  tradition 
connecting  Hebrews  with  Clement  R.  has  brought  his  name 
into  the  field,  and  a  comparison  with  i  Cletneni  shows  many 
points  of  resemblance.  Erasmus  was  inclined  to  accept 
Clement.  But  the  weak,  diffuse  style  of  Clement's  epistle 
is  quite  unworthy  of  the  author  of  Hebrews,  from  a  literary 
point  of  view  the  most  able  writer  in  the  N.T.  Origen  gives 
no  authority  for  the  tradition,  which  he  unites  with  that 
naming  St.  Luke.     Evidently  he  attached  no  weight  to  it. 

d.  Apollos. — Luther  first  suggested  the  name  of  ApoUos, 
which  has  found  much  favour  in  recent  days.  It  was 
advocated  by  Bleek  and  Dean  Alford.  Liinemann  was  so 
confident  as  to  speak  of  this  hypothesis  as  "  the  only  correct 
one,"  and  Davidson  regarded  it  as  the  most  probable.  The 
following  points  may  be  noted  in  its  favour : — 

(i)  Apollos  was  a  friend  of  St.  Paul,  in  general  sympathy 
with  the  apostle's  ideas,  and  associated  with  the  group  of  his 
friends,  yet  with  a  certain  independence  in  his  own  methods,  as 
we  may  gather  from  i  Corinthians  i.  and  ii.  This  would  suit 
the  author  of  Hebrews.    (2)  He  was  "  an  eloquent  man  "  (av^/) 

^  Page  422. 

^  Delitzsch  gives  a  long  list  of  linguistic  resemblances.  See  Com.  on 
Heb.,  Introd. 

'  See  Col.  iv.  ii,  14. 


426  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

A-oytos,  Acts  xviii.  24) ;  and  the  epistle  is  especially  charac- 
terised by  rhetorical  merits.  (3)  He  was  "mighty  in  the 
Scriptures,"  and  Hebrews  deals  with  the  O.T.  in  a  masterly 
way.  (4)  He  was  an  Alexandrian  Jew.  Now  Hebrews 
contains  many  Alexandrian  traits.  The  author  only  uses 
the  O.T.  in  the  LXX.  version,  and  he  reasons  in  the 
Alexandrian  method.  He  seems  familiar  with  Philo  and 
the  Book  of  Wisdom.^  If  Apollos  was  the  author,  we  must 
set  aside  the  idea  that  the  epistle  was  directed  to  the  Jeru- 
salem church  or  to  Palestinian  Christians  at  all;  but  that 
destination  has  been  doubted  on  other  grounds.  It  is  not 
quite  clear  how  Apollos  could  describe  himself  as  one  who 
had  received  the  gospel  from  those  who  had  been  personal 
disciples  of  Jesus  Christ,  since  he  was  instructed  by  Aquila 
and  Priscilla.  But  others  may  have  "  confirmed  "  this  teach- 
ing." 2 

A  further  difficulty  in  regard  to  Apollos  is  that  no  tradition 
whatever  has  preserved  his  name  as  that  of  the  author.  Con- 
sidering how  prominent  Apollos  was  in  the  first  century,  and 
how  much  the  question  of  the  authorship  of  Hebrews  seems 
to  have  been  discussed  in  the  second  century  (to  judge  by 
what  we  read  of  the  Alexandrian  teachers,  Pantsenus,  Clement, 
and  Origen  alone),  it  is  inconceivable  that  no  one  should  have 
discovered  the  secret  if  he  had  been  the  author  of  the  epistle. 
Clement  R.  wrote  to  Corinth  and  quoted  Hebrews  in  his 
epistle.     If  he  had  known  that  Apollos  had  written  that  work, 

^  Bleek  adduces  22  passages  of  resemblance  between  Heb.  and 
Philo.  In  particular  compare  Heb.  vi.  13  with  Philo,  Leg,  Allegor.^ 
vol.  i.,  p.  127  (edit.  Mang.)  ;  vii.  12  with  Leg.^  vol.  i.,  p.  102 — 
"the  king  of  Salem"  interpreted  as  "king  of  Peace"  ;  vii.  3  with  De 
Inebriebaie,  vol.  i. ,  p.  368,  the  rare  word  d/iT^rwp ;  iii.  5  with  Leg.  Allegor. , 
vol.  i.,  p.  128 — "Moses  was  faithful  in  all  his  house,"  the  very  same 
words.  Airaiyafffia  (Heb.  i.  3)  is  a  favourite  word  of  Philo's.  For 
comparison  with  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  compare  Heb.  i.  i  with  Wisd. 
vii.  22 — iroXvfjieph,  used  of  <ro<pia  ;  Heb.  i.  2  with  Wisd.  vii.  26 — 
airavyacriia,  also  used  of  aocpla  ;  Heb.  i.  3  with  Wisd.  xvi.  21 — vir6<TTa(ns  ; 
Heb.  xii.  17  with  Wisd.  xii.  10 — rbirov  fierapoias  ;  Heb.  xiii.  7  with  Wisd. 
ii.  17 — the  rare  word  iKpaan  for  death  in  both  cases.  Dean  Plumptre 
even  suggested  that  Heb.  and  Wisd.  were  written  by  the  same  author. 

2  Compare  Acts  xviii.  25,  26  with  Heb.  ii.  3,  **  Confirmed  unto  us  by 
them  that  heard." 


THE   AUTHOR  427 

surely  he  would  have  mentioned  him  when  citing  his  words 
for  the  benefit  of  the  church  of  which  he  was  one  of  the 
most  famous  teachers;  and  that  he  would  not  have  known 
is  most  improbable. 

e.  Barnabas, — Tertullian  assumes  that  the  epistle  is  the 
work  of  Barnabas,  writing,  "  There  is  extant  withal  an  epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  under  the  name  of  Barnabas,"  etc. ;  ^  and 
again,  "The  epistle  of  Barnabas  is  more  generally  received 
among  the  churches  than  that  apocryphal  *Hermas'  of 
adulterers,"  2  and  then  proceeds  to  cite  Hebrews  vi.  i,  4-6, 
and  again  7,  8,  thus  making  it  evident  that  he  means  our 
epistle.  Harnack  justly  remarks  how  unmethodical  it  is  to 
place  the  Barnabas  hypothesis  on  a  level  with  the  Clement, 
Luke,  and  Apollos  hypotheses,  which  have  no  such  authority.^ 
Tertullian  implies  that  Barnabas  was  the  accepted  author 
in  North  Africa,  and  North  Africa  was  in  close  connection 
with  Rome,  where  the  epistle  was  known  at  least  as  early 
as  Clement  R.  (a.d.  95).  Then  there  is  much  in  the  con- 
tents favouring  the  Barnabas  theory:  (i)  Barnabas  was  a 
companion  of  Paul,  and  yet  as  the  older  man  more  or 
less  independent.  (2)  He  could  speak  with  almost  apostolic 
authority.  (3)  A  Levite,  he  would  be  interested  in  the 
ritual  of  the  Levitical  system,  so  elaborately  discussed  in 
this  epistle.  (4)  A  native  of  Cyprus,  he  would  be  on  a 
line  of  close  communication  with  Alexandria  by  sea.  Philo's 
teaching  would  easily  pass  on  to  Cyprus.  In  the  Clementine 
Homilies  Barnabas  is  represented  as  teaching  in  Alexandria.* 
(5)  Known  in  the  N.T.  as  a  "son  of  consolation,"  or 
"  exhortation,'  ^  he  would  be  well  represented  by  an 
epistle,  the  c -ief  end  of  which  is  encouragement  of  the 
faint-hearted. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  in  the  stichometrical  list  of  O.T.  and  N.T. 
books    at    the    end    of    Cod.    Claroraontanus    (D2)    "  The    Epistle    of 

^  De  Pudic.i  20. 

*  Ibid. 

'  Chronologie,  vol.  i.,  p.  477,  note  2. 

•»  Clem.  Horn. ,  i.  9. 

'  1/16$  Trapa/cXiJo-ews,  Acts  iv.  36. 


428  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Barnabas"  has  850  verses  assigned  to  it.  Comparing  this  number  with 
the  numbers  assigned  to  other  books,  we  see  that  it  would  suit  Hebrews 
better  than  our  so-called  epistle  of  Barnabas,  which  is  half  as  long  again. 

It  has  been  objected  that  Barnabas  was  not  eloquent,  since 

at  Lystra  he  was  taken  for  Zeus,  while  the  lot  of  Hermes  was 

assigned  to  Paul  as  the  chief  speaker.   (Acts  xiv.  12.)     But 

surely  it  is  a  just  reply  that  the  best  writer  is  not  always 

the  most  fluent  open-air  speaker.     The  highly-finished  literary 

style   of    Hebrews   would   not   be  so   suited  to  evangelistic 

addresses  as  St.  Paul's  more  rugged  oratory.      Then  it  has 

been  objected  that  the  author  of  Hebrews  makes  mistakes 

about  the  Temple  customs,  which  would  have  been  impossible 

to  Barnabas.     But  the  apparent  errors  admit  of  explanation, 

and  if  not  explained  they  are  not  prohibitive. 

(i)  The  pot  of  manna  and  Aaron's  rod  in  the  ark  (ix.  4),  where,  according 
to  I  Kings  viii.  9,  only  the  two  tables  of  stone  were  kept,  a  point  on 
which  Philo  and  Josephus  agree  ;  (2)  the  altar  of  incense  belonging  to  the 
holiest  place  (ix.  4),  but  general  association  may  be  all  that  is  meant ; 
(3)  the  high  priest  sacrificing  daily  (vii.  27).  At  all  events  he  was  free  to 
do  this,  and  his  conscience  might  be  thought  to  prompt  him  to  it. 

e.  Priscilla. — Harnack  has  made  the  brilliant  suggestion 
that  the  epistle  was  written  by  this  well-known,  capable,  and 
successful  woman-worker  in  the  primitive  Church,  and  he  is 
supported  by  Dr.  Rendel  Harris,  (i)  In  the  N.T.  her  name 
appears  before  that  of  Aquila  more  frequently  than  in  the 
usual  order  where  husband  and  wife  are  named,  suggesting 
that  she  was  the  leading  evangelist  of  the  two  (Acts  xviii.  18,  26; 
Rom.  xvi.  3 ;  2  Tim.  iv.  29).  (2)  She  was  associated  with 
Paul  in  his  work.  (3)  She  was  a  teacher  of  the  Alexandrian 
Apollos,  and  Hebrews  has  Alexandrian  affinities.  (4)  If  this 
epistle  was  written  by  a  woman,  the  fact  may  explain  the 
concealment  of  the  author's  name. 

2.  Date  and  Place  of  Writing. 

Whoever  wrote  Hebrews,  the  antiquity  of  the  work  is  assured 
by  the  fact  that  it  was  known  to  Clement  of  Rome. 

Clement  does  not  formally  introduce  his  references  as  quotations, 
nor  does  he  mention  any  author  or  book  in  connection  with  them  ; 
but  they  are  unmistakable.  Compare  Clement  R.,  i  Corinthians  ix. 
2  and  xii.  i  with  Hebrews  xi.  7,  31  ;  and  Clement  R.,  i  Corintkians 
xxxvi.  2  with  Hebrews  i.  3  ff. 


DATE   AND   PLACE   OF   WRITING     429 

From  indications  in  the  epistle  itself  we  may  infer  that 
it  was  written  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  a.d.  70, 
for  it  contains  no  reference  to  that  event,  while  its  argument 
dealing  with  the  transitory  character  of  Judaism  would  have 
been  strongly  supported  by  an  appeal  to  it  if  it  had  occurred. 
On  the  other  hand  we  cannot  place  Hebrews  very  early, 
because  it  indicates  that  the  first  generation  of  Christians 
had  passed  away.^  It  is  after  some  imprisonment  of  Timothy.^ 
Probably  we  should  place  it  in  the  decade  a.d.  60-70,  perhaps 
about  A.D.  68.3  It  is  quite  uncertain  where  the  epistle  was 
written. 

3.  The  Church  Addressed. — In  all  extant  MSS.  and  versions 
the  epistle  appears  as  addressed  "  To  the  Hebrews,"  and  this 
is  the  name  under  which  it  is  quoted  by  the  fathers.  Its 
aim  in  showing  the  superiority  of  Christianity  to  the  O.T. 
religion  would  be  specially  suitable  to  Jews.  In  the  opening 
sentence  the  writer  refers  to  the  Jews  as  "our  fathers"  (i.  i), 
and  in  describing  the  Incarnation  he  says  that  Christ  "took 
hold  of  the  seed  of  Abraham"  (ii.  16).  Then  the  promises 
to  Israel  pass  on  to  Christian  "people  of  God"  without  any 
hint  of  a  change  of  race  (iv.  9).  All  the  references  to  the 
Levitical  services  imply  that  the  readers  value  them.  Still 
some  one  church  is  addressed,  and  not  the  Jews  generally, 
as  several  definite  expressions  show.*  This  can  scarcely  be 
the  Jerusalem  church,  for  the  readers  are  not  addressed  as 
a  community  of  such  importance ;  they  had  not  had  martyrs 
(xii.  4) ;  and  they  had  been  givers  of  aid  (x.  34).  Some  com- 
munity of  Palestinian  Jews  would  suit  the  epistle  better. 
There  are  critics  who  hold  that  the  epistle  was  not  ad- 
dressed to  Jews  at  all.  The  treatment  of  Judaising  teaching 
as  a  "strange  doctrine"  (xiii.  9),  and  the  idea  of  "departing 
from   the  hving   God"     (iii.    12)   rather  than   from   Christ, 

*  See  ii.  3 ;  xiii.  7. 

*  xiii.  23. 

'  Harnaclc  considers  that  it  might  be  as  late  as  Domitian,  and  dates 
it  between  65  and  95. — Chron.,  pp.  475-479. 

*  V.  II,  12  J  X.  34;  xiii.  23,  24. 


430  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

seem  to  point  to  converts  from  heathenism.  Rome  has 
been  named  as  the  place  addressed. ^  The  use  of  the 
epistle  by  Clement  shows  that  it  was  known  there.  "They 
of  Italy"  (xiii.  24)  would  be  Italian  friends  of  the  readers. 
The  Neronian  persecution  is  thought  to  be  referred  to  in 
x-  32>  33-^  But  could  the  expression,  "Ye  have  not  yet 
resisted  unto  blood"  (xii.  4),  be  addressed  to  the  Roman 
church  after  Nero? 

Alexandria  has  also  been  suggested,  because  it  is  thought  the  temple 
of  Onias  might  suit  the  language  of  the  epistle  better  than  that  at 
Jerusalem.  But  the  writer  is  referring  to  the  tabernacle.  The  allegorical 
style  applies  to  the  writer  rather  than  the  readers.  The  epistle  ' '  to 
the  Alexandrians "  in  the  Muratorian  Fragment  may  be  our  Hebrews ; 
but  this  is  purely  a  matter  of  conjecture. 

4.  Occasion  of  Writing. 

The  church  addressed  is  in  distress,  undergoing  a  trial  of 
its  faith,  a  chronic  persecution  which  threatens  to  become 
acute  (xii.  1-13).  This  distress  is  accompanied  by  a  feeling 
of  disappointment  that  the  O.T.  hopes  are  not  realised. 
There  is  even  danger  of  a  relapse.  Yet  the  church  has 
a  good  record  in  connection  with  its  past  leaders  and  its 
own  generosity  and  sympathy  with  the  suffering.  It  is 
not  so  much  to  be  blamed,  as  warned,  exhorted,  and 
encouraged.  To  this  end  the  writer  aims  at  showing 
how  great  are  the  Christian  privileges  which  realise  and 
exceed  all  that  was  foreshadowed  in  the  Jewish  system ;  at 
the  same  time  he  urges  his  readers  practically  to  live  up 
to  their  privileges. 

5.  Contents. 

i.  1-3,  The  higher  revelation  in  the  Son  contrasted  with 
that  by  the  prophets. 

4-14,  The  superiority  of  the  Son  to  the  angels. 

*  This  view  is  supported  by  Renan,  Pfleiderer,  Harnack,  etc.  Hort, 
m  Judaistic  Christianity ^  pp.  156-159,  defends  the  Palestinian  locality. 
So  do  Salmon,  Bishop  Westcott,  and  Bruce. 

"^  Note  especially  the  singular  expression,  "  being  made  a  gazing  stock  ** 
{6€aTpi,^6fji.€voi),  aptly  suggesting  the  scene  in  Nero's  garden. 


CONTENTS  431 

ii.  1-4,  Warning  against  drifting  from  this  higher  revelation. 
5-8,  Superiority  to  the  angels  further  demonstrated. 
9-18,  Christ  humiliated  and  perfected  through  suffering. 

This  shows  why,  though  Scripture  declared  Him  to  be  greater 
than  the  angels,  we  see  Him  on  earth  in  an  inferior  condition.  The 
humiliation  is  for  the  sake  of  mankind,  that  Christ  may  be  a  merciful  and 
faithful  high  priest. 

iii.  1-6,  Christ  as  the  Son  contrasted  with  Moses,  who 
indeed  was  faithful  in  God's  house,  but  only  as  a  servant. 

7-19,  Consequent  warning  not  to  follow  the  example  of 
those  who  were  disobedient  to  Moses  in  the  wilderness. 
Since  our  Leader  is  greater,  our  obligation  not  to  fall  away 
is  correspondingly  more  urgent. 

iv.  1-13,  Continued  warning  and  exhortation  leading  to  an 
encouragement  based  on  the  very  failure  of  the  Israelites. 
Since  neither  under  Joshua  nor  under  David  had  they 
realised  the  promised  rest,  that  rest  must  still  remain  in  the 
future  for  the  people  of  God,  because  God's  word  is  sure. 

14-16,  Encouragement  to  boldness  of  access  to  the  throne 
of  grace  through  our  High  Priest. 

V.  i-io.  High  priesthood  of  Christ — which  a  psalmist 
describes  as  "after  the  order  of  Melchizedek" — compared 
with  that  of  Aaron  in  two  respects — (i)  human  nature,  (2) 
divine  appointment. 

1 1 -1 4,  Elementary  condition  of  the  readers,  who  need 
milk,  not  solid  food. 

vi.  1-8,  Need  to  advance,  because  of  the  danger  of  falling 
away  to  hopeless  ruin. 

9-12,  A  better  hope  for  the  "Hebrews,"  who  at  least  do 
good  in  ministering  to  the  saints. 

13-20,  God's  blessing  assured  by  His  oath. 

vii.  1-28,  Allegory  of  Melchizedek.  (i)  His  unique  posi- 
tion (1-3) ;  (2)  His  superiority  to  the  Levitical  priests,  seeing 
that  in  Abraham  Levi  paid  tithes  to  him  (4-10);  (3)  His 
promised  coming  (in  Psalm  ex.)  implies  the  weakness  and 
failure  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood,  which  He  is  therefore  called 
to  supersede,  Himself  abiding  for  ever  (11-25);   (4)  Christ 


432  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

such  a  High  Priest,  and  further  superior  to  Aaron  because 
not  needing  to  offer  daily  sacrifices  for  Himself  (26-28). 

viii.  1-5,  Christ  the  High  Priest  of  the  heavenly  tabernacle 
offering  sacrifices. 

6-13,  The  new  covenant  promised  in  the  O.T. 

ix.  i-io,  The  tabernacle,  its  furniture,  and  its  services,  but 
temporary  and  to  serve  as  a  parable. 

11-22,  Christ  a  High  Priest  of  greater  things,  and  in  the 
more  perfect  tabernacle,  cleanses  our  consciences  by  His 
blood,  and  becomes  the  Mediator  of  the  new  covenant 
which  is  consecrated  by  His  blood,  as  the  old  covenant 
had  been  consecrated  by  the  Levitical  sacrifices. 

23-28,  Christ's  great  sacrifice  of  Himself  offered  once  for 
all  to  bear  the  sins  of  many. 

X.  1-4,  The  repetition  of  the  Levitical  sacrifices  a  sign  of 
their  impotence. 

5-18,  By  coming  to  do  God's  will,  Christ  superseded  the 
ineffectual  sacrifices  in  which  God  took  no  pleasure,  and  by 
one  offering,  perfected  the  consecrated  people,  who  now  have 
the  new  covenant  of  the  law  on  their  hearts. 

19-25,  Consequent  encouragement  to  enter  the  holy  place, 
and  maintain  the  assemblies  for  worship. 

26-31,  Warning  against  apostasy,  which,  to  those  who 
despise  the  Son  of  God,  must  bring  worse  punishment  than 
that  threatened  against  the  breakers  of  Moses'  law. 

32-39,  Encouragement  to  be  faithful  in  memory  of  early 
days,  and  the  heroism  of  the  martyrs. 

xi.,  The  heroes  of  faith. 

xii.  I,  2,  Consequent  exhortations  to  run  the  race  with 
diligence. 

3-13,  Chastisement  to  be  endured  as  a  proof  of  sonship. 

14-17,  Exhortation  to  peace,  and  fideHty. 

18-29,  Our  Mount  Zion  superior  to  the  mount  of  the  law, 
and  therefore  its  associated  utterances  more  weighty. 

xiii.  1-7,  Definite  exhortations  concerning  brotherly  love, 
hospitality,  prisoners,  marriage,  the  love  of  money,  content- 
ment ;  former  ministers  of  the  Church  to  be  remembered. 


THE   ARGUMENT   AND   PURPOSE     433 

8-9,  Christ  being  changeless,  we  are  exhorted  not  to  be 
unsettled  by  strange  teachings. 

10-15,  Our  altar  outside  the  camp,  and  the  city  we  seek. 

16,  17,  Charity  and  obedience. 

18,  19,  Prayers  of  the  Hebrews  sought;  hope  of  seeing 
them  soon. 

20,  21,  Benediction  and  doxology. 

22,  Concluding  explanations. 

24,  25,  Salutations  and  benediction. 

6.  The  Argument  and  Purpose. 

There  is  a  unity  in  the  argument  of  Hebrews  such  as  we 
find  in  no  other  book  of  the  N.T.  The  writer  continually 
breaks  the  thread  of  his  argument  to  draw  practical  con- 
clusions and  exhort  his  readers  to  conduct  corresponding 
to  each  point  reached.  Nevertheless,  he  resumes  it  again 
where  he  left  off,  and  thus  carries  it  on  to  the  end.  The 
eloquent  exordium  starts  the  theme.  Christ  as  the  Son  is  a 
manifestation  of  God  superior  to  the  revelation  in  the  O.T. 
That  came  by  angels;  the  new  revelation  is  in  a  Son.  The 
old  covenant  was  served  by  Moses,  a  servant ;  the  new  is  in 
the  hands  of  Christ,  the  Son.  Then  in  regard  to  the  priest- 
hood, Christ  is  Hke  Melchizedek,  and  in  many  ways  superior 
to  Aaron ;  it  is  the  same  with  His  sacrifice,  which  is  far 
superior  to  those  of  the  law;  His  heavenly  tabernacle  is 
greater  than  the  Levitical  tabernacle  on  earth;  and  now  we 
are  called  to  the  heavenly  Zion,  greater  than  Sinai  in  the 
wilderness.  Thus  the  new  covenant  has  all  that  was  in  the 
old,  and  has  it  in  a  higher,  better,  more  effectual  way.  The 
conclusion  is  to  prize  this  new  covenant,  and  be  faithful  to  it. 
The  splendid  hero-roll  of  faith  comes  in  aptly  here  in  the 
concluding  exhortation.  If  faith  under  the  inferior  covenant 
produced  such  magnificent  results,  what  sort  of  men  should 
we  be  who  have  the  greater  covenant  ? 


2   F 


CHAPTER  X. 
THE   GENERAL   EPISTLES 


1.  James — Question    of  Author- 

ship and  Origin. 

2.  I  Peter— Relation  to  St.  Paul. 

3.  2  Peter. 

I.  James. 


4.  Jude. 

5.  I  John. 

6.  2  John. 

7.  3  John. 


a.  The  Authorship  and  Origin. — The  epistle  opens  with 
the  name  of  its  writer  as  "James,  a  servant  of  God  and  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ"  (i.  i),  and  it  gives  no  further  in- 
formation as  to  who  this  James  is.  He  could  not  be  Zebedee's 
son,  who  was  killed  as  early  as  a.d.  44,  for  the  epistle  can 
scarcely  be  placed  so  far  back  as  that.  We  know  nothing 
of  James  "The  Little"  to  lead  us  to  assign  it  to  him.  The 
only  James  known  in  the  N.T.  history,  to  whom  it  can  be 
referred  with  any  probability,  is  "the  Lord's  brother,"  the 
leader  of  the  Jerusalem  church,  and  to  him  it  has  been 
ascribed  by  church  tradition. 

The  epistle  was  not  universally  accepted  in  the  early  church. 
Still  it  was  cited  by  Hermas  in  Rome,  and  by  Irenseus  in 
Gaul.  It  seems  to  have  been  in  the  Old  Latin  version 
and  the  Syriac.  Origen  is  the  first  to  ascribe  it  to  St.  James. 
Eusebius  places  it  among  the  Antilegof?ie?iay  but  accepts  it 
himself.^ 

Hermas  has,  '  *  If  ye  resist  the  devil,  he  will  be  conquered,  and  flee 
from  you  in  disgrace  "  (Mand.  xii.  5) ;  compare  James  iv.  7.  But  it  could 
be  said  that  "James"  here  cites  "  Hermas."  Irenaeus  plainly  cites  it,  but 
unlike  his  habit  with  St.  Paul's  epistles  he  does  not  ascribe  it  to  any 
author;  compare  Adv.  Haer.^  iv.  16,  2  with  James  ii.  23.  Clement  A. 
seems  to  have   used  it,^    and  so  perhaps   does    Hippolytus.^      Origen 

1  H.E.,  ii.  23  and  iii.  25. 

2  See  Eusebius,  H.E.^  vi.  14;  Cassiodorus,  Instit.  Divin. 
Script,  y  viii. 

»  Discourse  on  End  of  World  (doubtfully  ascribed  to  Hippolytus),  47. 

434 


JAMES  43S 

ascribes  the  epistle  to  James  in  his  commentary  on  John.  It  is  not 
included  in  the  Muratorian  Canon  ;  but  from  the  time  of  Athanasius, 
who  acknowledged  it,  the  epistle  grew  in  favour,  and  a  century  later, 
in  the  time  of  Augustine  and  Jerome,  it  was  all  but  universally  acknow- 
ledged. 

There  is  much  in  the  contents  of  the  epistle  that  suits 
what  we  know  of  St.  James.  If  not  from  Acts  xv.,  at  all 
events  from  Galatians  i.  and  ii.  we  gather  that  he  represented 
the  more  Jewish  and  less  evangelical  type  of  Christianity,  and 
this  is  what  we  find  in  the  epistle.  No  book  of  the  N.T., 
except  the  gospels,  contains  so  many  echoes  of  the  teachings 
of  our  Lord,  and  in  this  respect  it  may  be  thought  to  naturally 
represent  the  mind  of  the  brother  of  Jesus.  These  echoes  are 
none  of  them  verbally  identical  with  gospel  logia^  which  is  a 
reason  for  supposing  the  epistle  was  written  before  the  gospels, 
and  that  its  author  drew  on  oral  tradition.^ 

Nevertheless  serious  objections  have  been  raised  to  the 
belief  that  this  James  was  the  author : — 

(i)  It  is  said  to  be  improbable  that  James,  the  brother  of 
the  Lord,  should  have  written  with  no  reference  to  the  life 
of  Christ  or  His  great  work  in  all  he  had  to  say.  This 
epistle  only  mentions  Jesus  Christ  twice  (i.  i ;  ii.  i),  and 
then  without  any  descriptive  details.  It  says  nothing  of  His 
character  and  doings  on  earth.  His  death,  resurrection,  and 
redemptive  work.  But  we  cannot  assert  that  St.  James  would 
have  referred  to  these  subjects  in  a  short  practical  letter; 
we  have  no  means  of  judging  what  were  his  ideas  concerning 
their  importance. 

(2)  It  has  been  thought  improbable  that  a  Galilean  peasant 
would  have  had  the  very  rich  vocabulary  and  command  of 
language  revealed  in  this  epistle,  which  contains  many  rare 
words  and  some  elegant  phrases  only  to  be  acquired  through 
a  knowledge  of  Greek  literature.  Unlike  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus 
and  Rome,  and  St.  John  at  Ephesus,  St.  James,  who  resided 
at  Jerusalem  till  his  death,  had  no  opportunity  for  coming 
into    contact    with    the    Greek    world   of   culture.     Bishop 

1  A  full  list  of  these  resemblances  is  in  Zahn's  Einleiiung,  vol.  i., 
pp.  87.  88. 


436  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

Wordsworth  suggested  that  he  wrote  the  epistle  in  Aramaic, 
and  that  then  a  scholarly  man  translated  it  into  Greek.  The 
style  is  Hebraistic  in  its  abruptness.  And  yet  it  does  not  read 
Hke  a  translation.  We  must  admit  that  this  is  a  difficulty; 
but  again  we  must  remember  that  we  know  very  little  about 
St.  James. 

(3)  It  is  said  to  contain  quotations  from  other  N.T.  works. 
But  it  is  possible  that  in  some  cases  the  quotations  may  be 
from  James  in  the  other  writings.  This  applies  especially 
to  I  Peter,  which  most  clearly  contains  similar  passages  to 
what  we  find  in  James,  i  Peter  plainly  quotes  from  some 
of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  and  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
its  resemblances  to  James  are  to  be  explained  in  the  same 
way. 

Compare  James  i.  10,  1 1  with  i  Peter  i,  24 ;  James  iv.  6  with  i  Peter 
V.  5  ;  James  v.  20  with  i  Peter  iv.  18.  Other  comparisons  suggested 
are  James  ii.  23  with  Romans  iv.  3,  and  Galatians  iii.  6.  But  these  are 
not  so  close.  ^ 

(4)  The  circumstances  of  the  church  addressed  are  said 
not  to  suit  the  times  of  St.  James.  Many  corruptions  have 
crept  in.  In  particular  the  rich  are  domineering  over  the 
poor.  This  is  not  like  the  church  life  portrayed  in  Acts. 
But  it  may  be  that  in  some  cases  St.  James  when  most 
vehement  is  not  really  addressing  any  of  his  readers,  but 
apostrophising  the  rich  as  a  class  (especially  in  iv.  13- 
V.  6).  Or  it  may  be  that  a  Jewish  synagogue  had  adopted 
Christianity,  while  a  minority  of  its  members  was  not  con- 
verted to  the  new  faith. 

(5)  The  apparent  contradictions  to  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of 
justification,  side  by  side  with  the  exaltation  of  living  faith, 
are  thought  by  some  to  be  impossible  for  St.  James.  We  must 
say  that  either  the  epistle  came  before  the  great  controversy, 
or  long  after  it.     If  before,  it  could  be  by  James. 

Pfleiderer'^  holds  that  the  epistle  is  written  to  counteract  the  anti- 
nomianism  of  extreme   Paulinists    of  a   later  time  who   misunderstood 

*  See  HOLTZMANN,  EinkUung,  pp.  335,  336. 

*  UrchrUtenthum,  p.  865  fF. 


JAMES  437 

the  apostle.  Spitta^  maintains  that  the  book  is  a  Jewish  work  adapted 
by  some  Christian  who  merely  inserted  a  Christian  phrase  in  one  or  two 
places,  e.g.^  the  words  "Jesus  Christ"  twice.  He  points  out  in  great 
detail  the  similarity  of  its  utterances  throughout  to  what  may  be  found 
in  purely  Jewish  literature.  This  paradoxical  theory  fails  to  account 
(i)  for  the  singular  resemblance  to  the  teachings  of  Jesus  ;  (2)  for  the 
silence  of  the  author  concerning  the  ceremonial  law ;  (3)  for  the  self- 
restraint  of  the  adapter  in  not  being  more  definite,  especially  in  the 
description  of  St.  James,  who  is  to  authenticate  the  work.  While  with 
Spitta  the  work  is  very  primitive,  before  the  N.T.,  with  Harnack  it  is 
late.  The  name  James,  he  holds,  may  be  given  in  good  faith,  and  not 
intended  to  represent  the  Lord's  brother,  but  standing  for  some  other 
James.  With  Harnack,'^  however,  the  work  is  not  an  epistle  at  all,  but  a 
collection  of  extracts  from  several  Christian  homilies.  He  regards  it  as 
not  epistolary  in  character,  and  too  disjointed  to  be  one  work.  And  yet 
is  there  not  a  marked  unity  of  style  throughout  ? 

b.  Date.  —  The  question  of  the  date  of  this  epistle  is 
bound  up  with  that  of  its  authorship.  If  it  is  early,  there 
is  strong  reason  for  believing  it  to  be  the  work  of  James, 
the  brother  of  the  Lord.  Now  there  is  much  in  it  that 
favours  an  early  date  : — (i)  The  very  lack  of  Christian  theology 
points  to  a  time  before  this  had  been  elaborated  by  St.  Paul, 
and  thus  makes  for  the  primitive  character  of  the  epistle. 
(2)  If,  as  the  opening  salutation  suggests,  it  was  written 
to  Jews,  we  should  expect  to  see  some  allusion  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  unless  it  were  earlier  than  that 
event.  (3)  On  the  same  hypothesis  the  total  silence  as  to 
Gentile  churches  would  be  strange;  there  is  no  hint  of  the 
existence  of  such.  But  of  course  these  two  arguments  do 
not  hold  with  those  who  deny  the  Jewish  destination  of 
the  epistle.  (4)  The  church  order  is  most  elementary. 
Neither  "bishops"  nor  "deacons"  are  named;  we  only 
meet  with  "teachers"  (iii.  i),  and  "elders"  (v.  14);  and 
the  teaching  seems  to  be  quite  unorganised,  as  at  Corinth 
in  the  time  of  i  Corinthians.  The  direction  to  send  for 
elders  to  pray  for  the  sick  and  anoint  them  (v.  14)  is  most 
primitive.  So  is  the  description  of  the  Church  as  a 
"synagogue"  (ii.  2).  But,  if  early,  the  epistle  must  be 
very  early,  to  come  before  the  outbreak  of  the  controversy 

^  Zur  Geschichte  u,  LiUerat.  des  Urchrist.,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  I  ff. 
'  Chronologies  pp.  485-491. 


438  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

on  St.  Paul's  teaching,  i.e.^  before  a.d.  50,  and  thus  it  must  be 

the  first  written  book  of  the  N.T.^     With  this  understanding 

it  can  be  ascribed  to  St.  James. 

On  the  other  hand  serious  reasons  have  been  brought  forward  for  quite 
a  late  date  : — ( i )  The  improbability  that  the  epistolary  form  for  treating 
religious  truth,  unknown  before  the  N.T.,  should  have  been  originated 
by  this  epistle  rather  than  by  St.  Paul's  epistles.  The  originality  of  the 
method  suggests  a  great  original  mind — St.  Paul's  rather  than  St.  James's. 
(2)  The  corruptions  of  the  church,  which,  however,  might  be  assigned 
to  the  original  Jewish  synagogue,  as  already  suggested.  (3)  The  supposed 
reference  to  ultra-Paulinism.  It  is  said  to  be  impossible  for  a  contest  about 
the  relative  value  of  faith  and  works  to  have  arisen  before  St.  Paul's  teachings 
on  the  subject.  This  is  a  serious  consideration  ;  but  the  antithesis  is  not 
that  of  Paul,  who  contrasts  faith  with  law,  not  with  works ;  besides,  the 
author  has  other  contrasts,  e.g.^  words  and  deeds.  (James  i.  19-27.)  (4) 
Blaspheming  "the  honourable  name"  (ii.  7)  is  said  to  point  to  persecutions 
later  than  Acts,  when  Christians  were  prosecuted  as  such,  in  the  manner 
suggested  by  i  Peter  iv,  16.  But  the  language  is  too  vague  to  be  pressed 
to  this  meaning.  Early  Jewish  persecutions  of  Christians  must  have  in- 
volved insults  to  the  name  of  Jesus.  The  very  expression,  "suffer  dis- 
honour for  the  name,"  occurs  in  connection  with  the  earliest  persecutions 
at  Jerusalem  (Acts  v.  41).  The  case  is  perplexing;  but  if  the  epistle  is 
late,  it  must  be  quite  down  in  the  second  century.'-*  And  the  indications 
of  a  primitive  character  are  against  that  position.  Since  we  cannot  rest 
in  the  intervening  period,  we  seem  driven  back  to  the  early  date. 

c.  Place  of  Writi?ig.  —  This  is  not  given,  but  there  are 
indications  that  specially  suit  Palestine,  such  as  allusions 
to  "  the  early  and  latter  rain  "  (v.  7),  the  effect  on  vegetation 
of  the  burning  wind  (i.  11),  the  existence  of  salt  and  bitter 
springs  (iii.  11),  the  cultivation  of  figs  and  oHves  (iii.  12),  and 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  sea  (i.  6;  iii.  4)."^  This  would 
favour  St.  James  as  the  author. 

d.  T/ie  Persons  Addressed. — The  epistle  is  addressed  "  to 
the  twelve  tribes  which  are  of  the  dispersion"  (i.  i).  If  it 
comes  from  the  Jerusalem  James,  we  must  take  this  Uterally. 
St.  James  is  writing  to  the  dispersion ;  only  we  must  under- 
stand him  to  refer  to  Christians,  i.e.,  Christian  Jews  outside 
Palestine.  But  on  the  theory  of  the  late  date  the  address 
is  held  to  be  figurative,  referring  to  the  spiritual  Israel,  i.e., 
Christians,  not  Jews  at  all.     In  favour  of  this  opinion  it  is 

^  See  Mayor,  Com.,  pp.  cxix.-cxliv. 

2  Jiilicher  dates  it  a.d.  125-150  ;  Harnack — the  homilies  out  of  which 
he  holds  it  to  be  constructed — a.d.  120-140. 
See  Mayor,  Com.,  p.  cxviii. 


JAMES  439 

pointed  out  that  the  epistle  seems,  in  part  at  least,  to  have 
one  church  in  view  {e.g.^  ii.  2).  But  there  is  very  little  that 
can  be  so  construed,  and  that  is  more  than  counterbalanced 
by  the  fact  that  no  names  or  personal  references  whatever 
besides  the  name  of  the  writer  appear. 

e.   Cotitents. 

i.  I,  Greeting. 

2-4,  Trials  endured  with  patience  helpful. 

5-8,  Wisdom  to  be  sought  from  God ;  the  instability  of  the 
double-minded  man. 

9-1 1,  Exaltation  of  the  lowly,  and  temporary  character 
of  the  prosperity  of  the  rich. 

12-15,  The  genesis  and  the  fruit  of  sin. 

16-18,  The  Father  of  lights.  His  gifts,  and  the  life  He 
engenders. 

19-27,  Foolish  speech  discouraged,  and  good  deeds  com- 
mended as  the  true  ritual. 

ii.  1-7,  Warning  against  cringing  to  the  rich  and  dishonour- 
ing the  poor. 

8-13,  The  royal  law  of  love  to  our  neighbour. 

14-20,  A  warning  against  having  belief  without  works. 

21-26,  Abraham  and  Rahab  justified  by  works. 

This  is  the  passage  in  which  the  controversy  with  ultra  -  Paulinism  is 
suspected.  It  is  to  be  noticed  how  small  a  part  of  the  epistle  is  thus 
occupied — ^just  half  one  of  the  five  chapters,  13  verses  out  of  108.  There- 
fore it  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  the  epistle  was  written  merely  or 
mainly  to  deal  with  this  one  topic.  Then  neither  the  faith  nor  the  justi- 
fication here  referred  to  are  those  of  St,  Paul.  Not  the  faith — for  here 
Tiarts  is  mere  de/ze/  (see  verse  19)  ;  but  with  St.  Paul  it  is  irusf  and 
loyalty^  surrender  of  the  soul  and  adhesion  of  the  will,  what  St.  James 
would  call  "living  faith,"  that  which  shows  itself  by  its  works.  Not  the 
justification — for  here  the  idea  is  acquittal  at  the  final  judgment ;  but  with 
St.  Paul  SiKalojo-is  is  the  act  of  forgiveness  with  which  the  Christian  life 
begins.  It  is  true  the  very  opposite  use  of  the  story  of  Abraham  from  St. 
Paul's  (in  Galatians  iii.,  and  Romans  iv.)  suggests  the  appearance  of 
antagonism.  If  it  is  there  Pfleiderer  must  be  right,  the  antagonism  must 
be  to  the  ultra- Paulinism  of  a  later  generation,  which  misinterpreted  the 
apostle.  But  the  frequent  use  of  the  name  of  Abraham  in  the  N.T. — it 
occurs  no  less  than  72  times — suggests  that  it  was  familiarly  used  in  Jewish 
theological  discussions,  so  that  the  coincidence  may  be  accidental.  "  Rahab 
the  harlot"  occurs  in  Hebrews  xi.  31,  in  witness  to  faith — possibly  also  a 
familiar  name  in  Jewish  discussions,  though  the  coincidence  has  been  cited 
as  a  sign  that  James  used  Hebrews. 


440  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

iii.  I-I2,  On  bridling  the  tongue. 

13-18,  The  wisdom  from  above  contrasted  with  the  factious- 
ness of  earthly  wisdom. 

iv.  I- 10,  The  quarrels  that  arise  from  covetousness,  and  the 
evil  of  pride  and  worldliness. 

11,  12,  Against  maligning  or  judging  a  brother. 
13-17,  The  foolishness  of  boasting  about  the  morrow. 
V.  1-6,  A  denunciation  of  the  rich. 

7-1 1,  Patience  commended,  with  illustrations  from  the 
husbandman  and  Job. 

1 2,  Against  swearing. 

13-18,  Prayer  and  praise  commended.  The  great  efficacy 
of  prayer,  illustrated  from  the  example  of  Elijah,  especially 
for  a  sick  person,  on  behalf  of  whom  elders  are  to  be  sent  to 
pray  over  him  and  anoint  him,  when  the  Lord  will  raise  him 
up. 

19,  20,  The  great  work  of  converting  a  sinner. 

This  epistle  is  practical  throughout.  It  denounces  faults, 
and  encourages  right  conduct.  It  does  not  discuss  doctrines. 
The  abuses  it  contends  against  —  foolish  talk,  respect  of 
persons,  empty  belief,  ambition  for  teaching  others,  carnal 
w^isdom,  covetousness,  unkind  judgments,  boasting,  the 
oppression  of  labourers  by  the  rich — are  all  in  the  region 
of  conduct.  The  opposite  conduct  is  commended  in  pre- 
cepts reminding  us  of  the  teachings  of  Jesus  in  the  synoptics. 
The  book  is  more  like  a  homily,  or  a  series  of  homilies,  than 
an  epistle.  But  it  might  be  regarded  as  a  pastoral  for  general 
circulation  among  Jewish  Christians. 

2.  1  Peter. 

a.  Genuineness. — This  epistle  claims  to  be  by  "Peter,  an 
apostle  of  Jesus  Christ  "(i.  i).  It  is  one  of  the  best  attested 
books  of  the  N.T.  If  we  were  sure  that  2  Peter  was  genuine, 
we  should  say  that  the  earliest  witness  was  that  epistle. 
(2  Peter  iii.  i.)  i  Peter  was  known  to  the  author  of  the 
Didache,  and  to  Polycarp,  Papias,  and  the  author  of  the 
Epistle   to    Diognetus.     As   usual,    Irenaeus   is   the  first   to 


I   PETER  441 

name  it.  Later  fathers  quote  from  it  freely.  It  is  among  the 
Homologoumena  of  Eusebius,  though  it  is  not  in  the  Mura- 
torian  Fragment, 

The  Didachl  has  "abstain  from  fleshly  and  bodily  lusts"  (i.  4),  which 
reminds  us  of  i  Pet.  ii.  11.  Compare  Polyc,  Phil  i  with  i  Pet.  i.  8  ; 
Phil.  2  with  I  Pet.  i.  13  ;  Phil.  8  with  I  Pet.  ii.  22  and  24.  Eusebius 
states  that  Papias  '*  made  use  of  testimonies  from  the  first  epistle  of  John, 
and  likewise  from  that  of  Peter"  {H.E.^  iii.  39).  Compare,  further, 
Epis.  to  Diog.  6  with  i  Pet.  il  11.  Irena:us  writes,  "And  Peter  says  in 
his  epistle,  Whom  having  not  seen  ye  love,  etc."  {Adv.  Haer.^  iv.  9.  2)  ; 
compare  i  Pet  i.  8.  After  this  it  is  needless  to  cite  the  frequent  quota- 
tions in  Clement  A.,  Origen,  and  TertuUian.  The  omission  from  the 
Muratorian  Fragment  is  a  curious  fact.  Certainly  the  epistle  was  known 
earlier.  Yet  the  writer  does  not  name  it  to  reject  it,  as  he  does  in  the  case 
of  some  spurious  works  ;  accordingly  Dr.  Salmon  sets  the  omission  down 
to  an  accident  of  carelessness.  ^ 

Then  the  internal  evidence  shows  much  that  agrees  with  the 
character  and  history  of  Peter.  The  author  seems  to  make  a 
difference  between  himself  and  his  readers  in  saying  "  Whom 
having  not  seen  ye  love  "  (i.  8),  and  he  describes  himself  as  a 
witness  of  the  sufferings  of  Christ.  There  are  several  points 
of  resemblance  between  the  epistle  and  the  speeches  assigned 
to  Peter  in  Acts.  Thus  in  both  appeal  is  made  to  O.T.  pre- 
dictions of  the  sufferings  of  Christ  (Acts  iii.  18;  i  Peter  i.  10); 
in  both  we  have  the  reference  to  the  stone  that  was  rejected 
by  the  builders  (Acts  iv.  11;  i  Peter  ii.  7,  8) ;  in  both  the 
cross  of  Christ  is  described  as  a  "  tree,"  or  as  "  wood  "  {^vXqv 
— Acts  V.  30;  I  Peter  ii.  24).^ 

Davidson's  objection,  that  we  cannot  be  sure  of  the  verbal  accuracy  ol 
the  speeches  in  Acts,  is  no  adequate  reply ;  because  the  coincidences  exist 
and  they  are  too  slight  to  be  designed. 

But  over  and  above  these  details,  it  must  be  felt  by  the 
thoughtful  reader  of  this  epistle  that  its  author  was  a  man  of 
rare  spiritual  gifts,  who  stood  very  near  to  the  fountains  of 
inspiration.  This  is  one  of  the  very  choicest  gems  in  the 
N.T.,  worthy  of  the  great  apostle  whose  name  it  bears. 

Nevertheless,  it  is  held  by  many  that  the  epistle  is  wrongly 

^  Introd. ,  Lecture  xxii. 

2  For  a  number  of  similar  coincidences  see  Gloag,  Introd.  to  Cath. 
Epis.y  p.   114. 


442  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

assigned  to  St.  Peter.     The  following  are  the  chief  grounds  of 
objection : — 

(i)  The  epistle  is  entirely  in  the  line  of  St.  Paul's  teaching 
— so  much  so  that  Harnack  allows  the  possibility  that  Paul 
himself  may  have  written  it,  though  he  assigns  it  to  a  disciple 
of  the  apostle.  ^  This  objection  was  stronger  when  the 
Tubingen  hypothesis  was  maintained,  since  that  hypothesis 
involved  the  direct  antagonism  of  Peter  and  Paul.  It  is  now 
widely  admitted  that  no  such  antagonism  existed.  Still  it  is 
remarkable  to  find  Peter  thoroughly  absorbing  Paulinism,  so 
that  there  is  no  other  book  of  the  N.T.  not  written  by  Paul 
himself  that  so  closely  resembles  his  writings.  And  then 
there  are  but  the  fewest  reminiscences  of  the  earthly  life  of 
Christ,  only  such  as  could  have  been  gathered  from  the  general 
knowledge  possessed  by  the  church ;  so  that  Peter  here 
appears  as  having  learnt  more  from  Paul  than  from  Christ. 
Moreover  there  are  many  allusions  to  some  of  Paul's  epistles, 
certainly  to  Romans,  probably  to  Ephesians.  It  is  said  to  be 
most  improbable  that  Peter  would  borrow  so  much  from 
Paul.  We  cannot  put  it  the  other  way  and  suppose  that  Paul 
borrowed  from  Peter,  for  Paul  prided  himself  on  his  inde- 
pendence of  the  older  apostles. 

Compare  i  Pet.  i.  i  with  Eph.  i.  4-7 ;  i  Pet.  i.  3  with  Eph.  i.  3  ;  I  Pet. 
i.  14  with  Rom.  xii.  2 ;  i  Pet.  i.  21  with  Rom.  iv.  24  ;  i  Pet.  ii.  5  with  Rom. 
xii.  I  ;  I  Pet.  ii.  6,  7  with  Rom.  ix.  33 :  i  Pet.  ii,  lo  with  Rom,  ix.  25,  26 ; 
I  Pet.  ii.  13  with  Rom.  xiii.  1-4;  i  Pet.  ii.  16  with  Gal.  v.  13;  i  Pet.  ii.  18 
with  Eph.  vi.  5  ;  I  Pet.  iii.  i  with  Eph.  v.  22  ;  i  Pet.  iii.  9  with  Rom. 
xii.  17  ;  I  Pet.  iv.  10,  11  with  Rom.  xii.  6,  7  ;  i  Pet.  v.  i  with  Rom.  viii. 
18  ;  I  Pet.  V.  5  with  Eph.  v.  21  ;  i  Pet.  v.  8  with  i  Thess.  v.  '6.  Then 
we  meet  with  Pauline  phrases  such  as  iv  Xpi<XT(^  (i  Pet.  iii.  16;  v.  10,  14); 
the  "revelation"  of  Christ  for  His  second  advent  (i.  7,  13  ;  iv.  13) ;  KuXeiv 
used  not  in  the  gospel  sense  of  the  open  invitation,  but  in  the  Pauline 
sense  of  the  "  effectual  call "  ;  instead  of  the  ^wtj  alwvios  of  Christ's  teach- 
ing as  the  end  of  the  gospel,  the  Pauline  56|a  etc' 

It  has  been  pointed  out  in  reply  that  St.  Peter  was  of  a  re- 
ceptive nature,  and  liable  to  be  influenced  by  the  associations 
immediately  surrounding  him  {e.g.y  at  Antioch,  according  to 

*  Chronologies  pp.  451-465. 

*  See  HOLTZMANN,  EinUitung^  p.  317. 


I    PETER  443 

Galatians  ii.  12).  If  he  and  St.  Paul  were  much  together  in 
their  later  years  he  may  have  come  to  lean  on  the  stronger 
apostle.     But  the  author  shows  some  originality.^ 

(2)  It  is  improbable  that  Peter  would  have  written  to  the 
churches  of  Asia,  which  had  been  the  scenes  of  Paul's  labours, 
without  once  naming  the  great  apostle  who  had  founded  them 
and  watched  over  them.  His  ministry  was  for  the  Jews,  and 
indeed  we  cannot  understand  how  he  would  go  out  of  his  way 
to  address  these  churches  of  Gentiles  at  all — if  the  epistle  were 
designed  for  such.^ 

(3)  The  indications  of  a  comparatively  late  date  seem  to 
exclude  St.  Peter,  and  so  does  the  mention  of  Babylon  as  the 
place  of  writing.  But  these  objections  do  not  hold  together. 
If  the  date  is  late,  Babylon  may  stand  for  Rome. 

(4)  It  is  said  to  be  improbable  that  Peter,  a  fisherman  of 
Galilee  who  spoke  Aramaic,  and  who,  according  to  Papias, 
needed  an  interpreter  at  Rome,  should  have  written  in  the 
comparatively  good  Greek  of  this  epistle.  But  we  do  not 
know  in  what  sense  Mark  may  have  been  "  the  interpreter  "  of 
Peter,  nor  do  we  know  how  far  Greek  was  known  in  Palestine 
in  N.T.  times.  It  is  remarkable  that  all  our  N.T.  books  are 
in  Greek. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  these  are  serious  reasons  for 
questioning  the  Petrine  authorship.  If  we  hold  the  balance 
even  we  can  scarcely  allow  that  they  count  for  nothing.  To 
some  students  they  may  appear  to  be  of  overwhelming  force. 
This  is  a  case  in  which  it  cannot  be  wise  to  assume  a  very 
positive  attitude.  Criticism  is  teaching  us  that  there  are 
questions  concerning  which  fairness  and  modesty  suggest  that 
they  cannot  be  answered  with  assurance.  Nevertheless,  in  spite 
of  all  these  difficulties,  the  striking  testimony  of  early  recogni- 
tion, and  the  supreme  excellence  of  the  epistle  still  stand  as 
strong  reasons  for  believing  in  its  authenticity.^ 

*  See  paragraph  following  "  Contents." 
'  See  below,  page  445. 

•  Dr.  McGiffert  suggests  Barnabas  as  possibly  the  author,  since  he  was 


444  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

b.  Date  and  Place  of  Origin. — The  fact  that  the  epistle 
is  addressed  to  a  region  where  St.  Paul  had  laboured  compels 
us  to  date  it  later  than  the  arrest  of  the  apostle  at  Jerusalem 
(a.d.  58).  The  use  of  Romans  also  requires  this,  and  the 
probable  use  of  Ephesians  brings  it  down  at  least  to  a.d.  62. 
Then  the  fact  that  two  or  more  of  Paul's  epistles  are  known 
and  used  for  this  one  document  requires  some  longer  time 
still.  But  if  Peter  wrote  the  epistle,  we  cannot  go  beyond 
A.D.  66,  as  it  is  most  probable  his  martyrdom  occurred  no 
later.  Professor  Ramsay  dates  it  in  the  reign  of  Domitian, 
and  holds  that  Peter  lived  on  till  the  year  80,^  a  most  im- 
probable idea.  The  principal  reason  for  so  late  a  date  is 
found  in  the  references  to  persecution  which  involved  punish- 
ment for  the  Christian  "name"  (i  Peter  iv.  13-15),  apart 
from  any  accusation  of  specific  crimes.  This  was  not  known 
in  the  period  of  Acts,  though  it  was  seen  at  the  time  of 
Trajan.  On  the  other  hand  it  refers  to  the  persecution  as 
a  new  thing  (iv.  12),  and  St.  Peter  shows  a  friendly  attitude 
to  the  state,  and  writes  hopefully  (ii.  13  ff. ;  iv.  7 ;  v.  10). 
This  is  very  different  from  the  attitude  of  Revelation,  with 
its  bitter  antagonism  to  Romans  and  its  allusions  to  long  con- 
tinued persecution.  Dr.  McGiffert  points  out  that  we  have 
here  a  reason  for  putting  i  Peter  earlier  than  Revelation.^ 
The  question  of  the  place  of  writing  the  epistle  is  closely 
connected  with  that  concerning  the  date.  It  contains  a 
salutation  from  "Babylon"  (v.  13).  If  the  epistle  came 
later  than  Revelation,  this  might  be  the  Babylon  of  that 
book,  i.e.y  Rome,  although  it  would  be  strange  to  meet 
the  mystical  name  in  an   epistle.     There  is  good  evidence 


(i)  one  of  the  few  companions  of  Paul  who  could  fulfil  the  conditions  in 
V.  I  ;  (2)  a  missionary  to  Asia  Minor,  who  might  naturally  write  to  that 
region ;  (3)  known  to  Silvanus,  who  is  referred  to  in  v.  12  (see  Acts 
XV.  25  ff.) ;  (4)  a  near  relative  of  Mark,  whom  the  writer  calls  his  "son" 
in  V.  13  (se/e  Col.  iv.  10),  and  a  favourite  travelling  companion  (Acts 
XV.  37  ff.);  ,(5)  credited  in  the  church  with  having  written  an  epistle. 
Apostolic  Age,  pp.  599,  600. 

^  Church  in  the  Rom.  Emp.,  p.  262  ff. 

*  Apostolic  Age,  p.  597. 


I    PETER  445 

that  Peter  was  at  Rome.^  He  was  with  Mark  when  the  epistle 
was  written  (v.  14),  and  we  know  that  Mark  was  invited  to 
Rome  during  Paul's  last  imprisonment.  (2  Timothy  iv.  11.) 
But  if  this  is  earlier  than  Revelation,  Babylon  may  be 
either  the  city  of  that  name  by  the  Euphrates,  or  the 
Egyptian  Babylon  (near  the  present  Cairo). 2  We  have  no 
hint  that  Peter  went  to  either  place,  and  the  Jewish  colony 
at  Babylon  by  the  Euphrates  was  broken  up  and  removed 
to  Seleucia  by  this  time.  Still  some  Jews  may  have  been 
left  there. 

c.  The  Persons  Addressed.  —  These  are  called  "  elect 
sojourners  of  the  dispersion,"  in  districts  that  include  the 
whole  of  Asia  Minor  north  of  the  Taurus  mountains. 
The  question  is  whether  the  phrase  is  to  be  taken  literally 
for  Jews,  /.<?.,  Jewish  Christians,  or  figuratively  for  the  scattered 
communities  of  Christians,  chiefly  Gentile.  The  latter  is  the 
more  probable  interpretation,  for  two  reasons:  (i)  We  have 
no  evidence  of  the  existence  of  any  Jewish  Christian  churches 
in  these  parts.  Jews  and  Christians  mingled  in  the  Pauline 
churches.  (2)  The  language  of  the  epistle  implies  that  the 
readers  had  been  pagan.  ^ 

(d)  Contents. 

i.  I,  2,  Salutation,  with  a  reminder  of  the  Christian  election, 
and  its  consequent  sanctification. 

3-5,  Thanksgiving  for  the  incorruptible  inheritance. 

6-9,  The  trial  of  faith  supported  by  love  for  the  unseen 
Christ. 

10-12,  The  mystery  of  the  predicted  salvation  through  the 
sufferings  of  Christ. 

^  The  following  are  the  authorities  :  Clem.  R.  (i  Cor.  v.) ;  Dionysius 
of  Corinth  (Euseb.,  H.E.,  ii.  25);  Iren^us  {Adv.  Haer.^  iii.  i) ; 
Tertullian  {De  Bapt,  4;  Be  Prascr.,  36);  Caius,  of  Rome,  who 
refers  to  the  trophies  (tA  rpbiraia)  of  Peter  and  Paul  near  Rome  (Euseb., 
H.E.,  ii.  25);  "The  Preaching  of  Peter"  (quoted  by  Lactantius, 
Institut.  Divin.,  iv.  21) ;  and  of  course  many  later  writers. 

'  The  Coptic  Church  has  a  traditional  claim  for  this  Babylon  as  the 
place  of  Peter's  residence. 

*  See  i.  14,  18  ;  ii,  9,  10  (especially  note,  '*  which  in  time  past  were  no 
people  ")  J  iii.  6  ;  iv.  3. 


446  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

13-25,  Exhortation  to  holiness  on  the  ground  of  redemption 
by  the  blood  of  Christ  and  the  new  life  to  which  Christians 
are  begotten. 

ii.  I,  2,  Exhortation  to  guilelessness. 

3-10,  Christ  the  living  stone  rejected  by  men,  but  honoured 
by  God,  on  whom  Christians  are  built  to  form  a  spiritual 
house. 

II,  12,  Duty  to  behave  as  sojourners  and  pilgrims. 

13-17,  Duty  of  obedience  to  the  civil  government  in  order 
to  silence  calumniators. 

18-20,  The  duty  of  slaves  to  obey  and  endure  patiently. 

21-26,  Example  of  the  patience  of  Christ  when  He  endured 
reviling  and  bore  our  sins. 

iii.  1-6,  Duty  of  wives,  especially  with  respect  to  simplicity 
of  dress. 

7,  Duty  of  husbands. 

8-12,  General  duties  of  kindness  and  patience. 

13-17,  Suffering  for  well-doing  commended. 

18-20,  Christ  having  suffered  for  sin,  and  being  put  to 
death  in  the  flesh,  but  made  alive  in  the  Spirit,  preaching 
to  the  spirits  in  prison  who  had  been  disobedient  in  the  days 
of  Noah. 

21,  22,  The  cleansing  of  our  conscience  through  the 
resurrection  and  ascension  of  Christ. 

iv.  1-6,  Consequent  duty  to  have  the  mind  that  was  in 
Christ,  and  abandon  all  the  old  heathenish  abominations. 

7-1 1,  The  end  being  at  hand,  soberness  and  prayer  needed, 
but  chiefly  brotherly  love,  with  the  exercise  of  gifts  to  the 
glory  of  God. 

12-19,  Persecution  not  to  be  thought  strange,  but  regarded 
as  blessed  if  endured  for  the  name  of  Christ,  and  not  for  any 
crime. 

V.  1-4,  Charge  to  the  elders  to  be  good  pastors. 

5,  Charge  to  the  younger  members  to  be  subject  to  the 
elders. 

6-9,  Duty  of  all  to  be  humble,  trustful  in  God's  care,  sober, 
watchful,  steadfast. 


2   PETER  447 

lo,  II,  The  final  perfecting  from  God,  to  whom  be  the 
dominion  for  ever  and  ever. 

12,  The  letter  sent  by  Silvanus. 

13,  14,  Final  salutations  and  benediction. 

The  epistle  is  hortatory  throughout,  and  its  doctrinal  state- 
ments come  in  rather  to  enforce  the  practical  advice  than 
as  distinct  teaching.  The  persecution  so  frequently  referred 
to  is  a  great  trial  of  faith  and  constancy,  and  St.  Peter  en- 
deavours to  encourage  the  sufferers  with  cheering  assurances 
of  their  rich  inheritance  and  stirring  appeals  to  be  worthy 
of  their  redemption,  and  make  a  good  use  of  their  privileges. 
It  is  to  be  observed  that  Peter  lays  great  stress  on  the 
new  birth  (i.  3,  23;  ii.  2);  in  this  he  is  nearer  to  John 
than  to  Paul.  He  also  dwells  with  much  feeling  on  the 
redeeming  work  of  Christ,  connecting  this  more  with  the 
sufferings  of  Christ  than  is  the  case  in  St.  Paul's  epistles. 
The  discussion  of  the  behaviour  of  Christians  is  also  original 
in  this  epistle. 

3.  2  Peter. 

a.  Genuineness, — The  genuineness  of  this  epistle  has  been 
more  questioned  than  that  of  any  other  book  in  the  N.T. 
Erasmus  and  Calvin  expressed  doubts  concerning  it,  and  in 
the  present  day  many  who  may  be  regarded  as  conservative 
scholars  feel  compelled  to  join  hands  with  advanced  critics  in 
regard  to  it.  It  stands  on  an  entirely  different  ground  from  that 
of  I  Peter.  It  is  very  little  referred  to  in  early  patristic  literature. 
Even  Irenaeus  fails  us  here.  The  first  mention  of  the  epistle 
is  in  Origen.  Eusebius  places  it  among  the  Antilegomena.  It 
is  not  in  the  Muratorian  Fragment^  nor  in  the  Peshitto. 

2  Peter  ii.  5  has  been  compared  with  Clement  R.,  i  Cor.  7  j  and 
2  Peter  ii.  6-9  with  Clement  R.,  i  Cor,  2.  But  the  connection  is  not 
certain,  and  if  it  exists  the  probabiUty  is  that  2  Peter  is  dependent  on 
Clement.^  Possibly  Justin  Martyr  knew  the  epistle  {c.  Tryph.^  81  com- 
pared with  2  Peter  iii.  8) ;  but  the  allusion  may  be  to  Psalm  xc.  4. 
Hippolytus  seems  to  have  known  it  {Refuta,,  ix.  2,  x.  20).  But  he  does 
not  refer  to  its  author.     Origen,  the  first  to  name  Peter  in  connection  with 

1  See  Dr.  E.  A.  Abbott,  in  Expositor ^  2nd  series,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  152,  153. 


448  BIBLICAL   LNTRODUCTION 

the  epistle,  says, "  Peter  speaks  aloud  by  the  two  trumpets  of  his  epistles.*'* 
But  Eusebius  quotes  him  as  expressing  doubts  about  it.  *'  Peter  .  .  .  has 
left  one  epistle  undisputed.  Suppose  also  the  second  was  left  by  him,  for 
on  this  there  is  some  doubt "  {H.E.,  vi.  25).  Eusebius  himself  says  of  it, 
"As  to  the  writings  of  Peter,  one  of  his  epistles,  called  the  first,  is 
acknowledged  as  genuine.  .  .  .  But  that  which  is  called  the  second  we 
have  not  indeed  received  by  tradition  to  be  in  the  canon  {ipdiddrjKOp) ;  yet 
as  it  appeared  useful  to  many,  it  was  studiously  read  with  the  other 
scriptures  {ypa<pCJVf  U.E.^  iii.  3). 

There  is  not  much  that  can  be  appealed  to  as  internal 
evidence  in  favour  of  the  genuineness  of  the  epistle.  It  claims 
to  be  written  by  Peter  i^.  i\  cf,  iii.  i);  commences  with  the  same 
salutation  as  i  Peter.  But  of  course  this  could  be  designedly 
arranged  by  the  writer,  whoever  he  was,  if  he  possessed  i  Peter.^ 

On  the  other  hand  there  are  very  serious  difficulties,  (i) 
The  early  date,  which  it  would  be  requisite  to  assign  to  the 
epistle  if  it  were  written  by  St.  Peter,  seems  to  be  excluded  by 
the  reference  to  St.  Paul's  epistles  as  already  collected,  and  as 
in  Scripture  (iii.  15,  16).  i  Peter  used  some  of  the  Pauline 
epistles,  and  that  fact  was  a  difficulty  in  regard  to  it.  But  the 
case  is  much  stronger  here.  All  the  usage  of  the  early  church 
is  against  the  idea  that  these  epistles  were  put  on  a  level  with 
the  O.T.,  and  regarded  as  Scripture  during  the  lifetime  of  St. 
Peter.  (2)  The  relation  to  Jude  affords  another  grave  difficulty. 
Nearly  the  whole  of  the  short  epistle  of  Jude  is  taken  over 
and  utilised  in  2  Peter. 


Compare  Jude  4 

with 

2  Peter  ii.     1-3 

>i 

,)     6 

i>     4 

1) 

"   I 

,,            ,,     6 

>) 

>,      8 

M    10 

n 

„    10 

„  12 

M 

n     " 

M      IS 

•  » 

,,     12, 

13 

»,           i»  I3»  I 

}> 

„     16 

„  18 

1, 

»     17, 

iS 

„          "1.    1-3 

^  But  this  is  in  the  Latin  translation  of  Rufinus,  who  confessedly 
amends  the  original  (Migne,  vol.  ii.,  p.  857).  For  various  other  supposed 
references  to  2  Peter,  see  Gloag,  Introd.  to  the  Cath.  Epis.^  pp.  205-209; 
Charteris,  Canonicity,  pp.  313-318. 

*  Still  coincidences  with  the  speeches  in  Acts  may  be  noted,  e.g.^  com- 
pare 2  Peter  ii.  15  with  Acts  i.  18 — *'  wages  of  iniquity"  ;  2  Peter  iii.  10 
with  Acts  ii.  20 — **  the  day  of  the  Lord  "  ;  2  Peter  iv.  24  with  Acts  iv.  24 
— 8e(rir6T7]i  for  Christ  in  the  epistle,  for  God  in  Acts ;  but  the  original 
speech  was  in  Aramaic. 


2   PETER  449 

The  priority  must  be  assigned  to  Jude,  e.g. ,  2  Peter  ii.  4  is  less  distinct 
than  Jude  6,  which  gives  the  ground  of  the  condemnation  of  the  angels ; 
and  2  Peter  ii.  1 1  is  really  unintelligible  without  Jude  9,  a  mere  allusion  to 
what  is  there  stated.  In  2  Peter  we  read  '  *  whereas  angels  .  .  .  bring  not 
a  railing  judgment,  etc.,"  the  word  "  whereas  "  assuming  something  known. 
The  passage  in  Jude  gives  the  case  of  Michael,  when  he  durst  not  bring  a 
railing  accusation  against  the  devil,  and  puts  it  quite  clearly.  Moreover 
Jude  is  a  brief,  crisp  epistle,  while  2  Peter  is  less  firm  and  strong  in  style ; 
and  in  these  respects  Jude  appears  to  be  the  original.  In  favour  of  the 
priority  of  2  Peter,  it  is  urged  that  in  this  epistle  the  false  teachers  are  yet 
to  come  (ii.  1-3  ;  iii.  3),  while  in  Jude  they  are  already  present  (4).  But 
even  according  to  2  Peter  some  are  already  present  (ii.  10  ff.).^ 

Now  we  have  seen  that  i  Peter  made  use  of  earlier  writings. 
But  it  is  one  thing  to  lean  upon  Paul  and  even  James,  and 
another  thing  to  absorb  and  utilise  virtually  the  whole  of  the 
short  epistle  of  so  obscure  a  writer  as  Jude.  In  defending 
the  genuineness  of  2  Peter  we  accuse  the  great  apostle  Peter 
of  plagiarising  in  a  remarkable  way.  (3)  In  style  and  thought 
it  differs  greatly  from  i  Peter.  The  style  of  i  Peter  is  ex- 
cellent; that  of  2  Peter  most  awkward.  And  while  i  Peter 
is  saturated  with  Paulinism,  this  is  not  apparent  in  2  Peter. 
The  sufferings  of  Christ  and  the  thought  of  redemption,  which 
are  so  prominent  in  the  earlier  epistle,  are  not  brought  forward 
in  this.  The  writer  claims  to  have  been  a  witness,  but  of  the 
glory.  Of  course,  if  St.  Peter  did  not  write  i  Peter,  this  is  no 
objection  to  the  genuineness  of  2  Peter ;  but  the  evidence  for 
I  Peter  is  immeasurably  stronger  than  that  for  2  Peter.  See- 
ing that  the  epistle  is  very  weakly  attested  by  the  Fathers,  and 
that  it  was  always  the  most  doubtful  book  of  the  N.T.,  we 
have  little  to  bring  in  answer  to  these  strong  objections ;  and 
the  balance  seems  to  be  in  favour  of  denying  its  genuineness. 
It  is  impossible  to  say  who  wrote  it.  The  very  emphasis  with 
which  Peter's  name  is  claimed  and  this  epistle  linked  to 
I  Peter,  itself  a  suspicious  fact,  shows  that  the  author  desired 
to  use  the  apostle's  authority  for  what  he  wrote. 

Mr.  Vernon  Bartlet  suggests  a  compromise,  viz.,  that  ii.-iii.  7  was  intro- 
duced by  a  later  hand  into  a  genuine  epistle  of  St.  Peter's. 

b.   Occasion  and  Date  of  Authorship. — One  object  is  to  coun- 
teract certain  false  teachers.    The  language  both  of  2  Peter  and 
of  Jude  is  too  indefinite  to  enable  us  to  decide  for  certain 
*  Dr.  E.  A.  Abbott  has  shown  that  2  Peter  made  use  of  Josephus. 
2   G 


450  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

who  these  are — probably  those  constant  disturbers  of  the 
churches,  the  earUer  gnostics,  Cainites  or  Ophites.^  But  the 
writer  has  further  the  positive  object  of  endeavouring  to 
stimulate  the  efforts  of  his  readers  to  acquire  true  knowledge. 
The  right  gnosis  must  oppose  the  false  gnosis.  "  Knowledge  " 
is  the  keynote  of  2  Peter.  The  reference  to  St.  Paul's  epistles 
as  Scripture  requires  quite  a  late  date — probably  the  middle 
of  the  second  century.^ 

c.  The  Persons  Addressed. — The  epistle  is  quite  general,  with 
no  particular  address,  except  that  it  is  for  Christians — "  them 
that  have  obtained  a  Hke  precious  faith  with  us  "  (i.  i). 

d.  Contents. 

i.  1-2,  General  salutation. 

3-1 1,  Exhortation  to  progress  in  the  successive  acquisition 
of  Christian  graces. 

12-21,  Reminder  of  the  truth  of  the  Christian  teaching, 
confirmed  by  the  Divine  testimony  to  Christ  and  the  light  of 
prophecy. 

ii.,  The  false  prophets  and  their  evil  practices. 

iii.  1-7,  Rebuke  for  those  who  disbelieve  in  the  final  judg- 
ment. 

8-13,  The  coming  of  the  Lord  and  the  destruction  of  the 
world. 

14-18,  Exhortations  to  diligence,  patience,  and  growth  in 
grace. 

4.  Jude. 

a.  The  Author.  —  The  author  of  this  brief  epistle  intro- 
duces himself  as  "  Jude,  a  servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  brother 
of  James."  He  can  scarcely  be  the  apostle  Jude  (perhaps 
the  same  as  Thaddaeus  and  Lebbaeus),  although  that  apostle  is 
related  to  a  James,^  because  not  only  does  he  not  claim  to  be 

^  Mansel  suggests  the  Nicolaitans  of  Rev.  ii.  15  as  denying  Christ  and 
inculcating  immorality.  But  would  such  be  actually  teachers  within  the 
churches? 

2  Harnack  places  it  a.d.  160-175,  Chronologie^  pp.  465-470. 

'  'loiySaj/'Ia/fwjQou  (Luke  vi.  15),  "Jude  of  James,"  rendered  *' brother 
of  James"  in  A.V.,  evidently  on  the  ground  of  this  epistle,  but  "son  of 
James  "  in  R.  V.,  according  to  the  general  usage  of  the  idiom. 


JUDE  451 

an  apostle,  but  by  designating  himself  only  with  relation  to 
his  brother  he  excludes  any  such  authority  as  would  arise 
from  his  being  one  of  the  Twelve;  besides,  he  refers  to 
"  the  apostles  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ "  as  former  teachers, 
among  whom  he  does  not  include  himself  (17,  18).  It  is 
more  likely  that  he  is  a  brother  of  the  well-known  James,  head 
of  the  church  at  Jerusalem ;  and  if  so,  also  a  brother  of  our 
Lord.  We  can  understand  his  not  claiming  the  higher  rela- 
tionship. The  fact  that  he  takes  this  modest  position  makes 
for  the  genuineness  of  the  epistle;  and  so  does  the  fact  that 
so  little  known  a  man  appears  as  its  author.^  Who  would  wish 
to  pass  off  a  pseudonymous  epistle  as  the  work  of  a  man 
whose  identity  it  would  be  difficult  to  fix  ?  This  epistle  was 
often  referred  to  in  the  church  of  the  later  part  of  the  second 
century.  It  was  known  to  Clement  of  Alexandria,^  and  Ter- 
tullian,^  both  of  whom  cite  it  by  name;  and  it  is  in  the 
Muratorian  Fragment. 

The  epistle  is  quite  general,  being  addressed  simply  "to 
them  that  are  called,  beloved  in  God  the  Father,  and  kept 
for  Jesus  Christ"  (i);  but  it  presupposes  that  its  readers  had 
been  instructed  by  the  apostles  (17),  a  fact  which  would  point 
to  Palestine  or  Syria  as  the  more  probable  region  in  which  it 
would  be  first  circulated.  The  references  to  Jewish  apocryphal 
works  also  suggest  the  same  area,  where  they  would  be  best 
known.  The  work  must  be  comparatively  late  to  allow  of  the 
false  teachings  to  which  it  refers  having  crept  in,  but  there  is 
nothing  to  exclude  the  lifetime  of  a  brother  of  James. 

The  chief  indications  of  a  later  date  are  ( i )  The  reference  to  the  teaching 
of  the  apostles  (17).  Certainly  that  is  spoken  of  as  past ;  but  then  it  is 
supposed  to  be  in  the  memory  of  the  readers,  not  as  a  tradition,  but  as 
what  they  had  themselves  heard,  though  an  earlier  phrase — **the  faith 
which  was  once  for  all  delivered  unto  the  saints  "  (3)  might  be  taken  to  in- 
dicate tradition.  (2)  The  corrupt  teaching. — This  is  said  to  be  Ophite  or 
Cainite — "for  they  went  in  the  way  of  Cain"  (11) — i.e,^  gnostic  of  the 

*  There  is  no  direct  evidence  for  the  theory  that  the  author  of  the 
epistle  was  Judas  Barsabas  (Acts  xv.  22,  23) ;  but  as  this  Jude  is  called  "  a 
chief  man  among  the  brethren  "  at  Jerusalem,  it  must  be  allowed  to  be 
possible. 

3  Paedag.,  iii.  8. 

»  De  Cultu.  femin,  i.  3. 


452  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

early  second  century.  '*  The  error  of  Balaam  "  suggests  the  Nicolaitans 
(Rev.  ii.  14,  15.)  Still,  as  we  know  there  were  later  Cainites,  the  pointed 
reference  to  Cain  cannot  but  raise  a  suspicion  of  an  allusion  to  these 
heretics.  But  then  Cain  is  mentioned  for  warning  in  i  John  iii.  12  ;  and 
also  in  Heb.  xi.  4,  the  latter  undoubtedly  earlier  than  the  Cainites. 

The  author's  object  is  to  denounce  the  corrupt  teaching  and 
warn  his  readers  against  it.  This  teaching  has  two  evils.  It 
encourages  immorality,  and  it  denies  "our  only  Master  and 
Lord,  Jesus  Christ." 

b.   Conteftts. 

1 1  2,  Salutation. 

3,  4,  The  teaching  originally  received  to  be  maintained 
against  the  false  teachers. 

5-7,  Warnings  from  the  punishment  of  the  IsraeHtes,  of 
fallen  angels,  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah. 

8-10,  Railing  at  dignities  rebuked  from  the  example  of 
Michael. 

11-13,  Denunciation  of  the  corrupters  who  go  in  the  way 
of  Cain  and  Balaam,  and  spoil  the  Agaph  feasts. 

14-16,  These  false  teachers  in  accordance  with  the  prophecy 
of  Enoch. 

17-19,  Reminder  that  the  apostles  had  predicted  such 
teachers. 

20,  21,  Duty  of  edification  in  the  love  of  God,  and  hoping 
for  the  mercy  of  Christ. 

22,  23,  Every  effort  to  be  made  to  save  men. 

24,  25,  Concluding  doxology  to  the  God  who  can  keep  from 
stumbling. 

Origen  found  the  reference  to  Michael  in  the  *' Assumption  of  Moses" 
(De  Principits,  iii.  2),  on  which  Jude  here  draws. 

The  reference  to  Enoch  is  found  in  the  Book  of  Enoch  i.  9.  Both  of 
these  are  Jewish  apocryphal  works,^  though  the  latter  has  been  converted 
into  a  Christian  book  with  many  interpolations. 

5.  1  John. 

a.  Authorship. — As  in  the  case  of  Jude  the  question  of 

the  authorship  of  i  John  is  not  merely  whether  the  epistle 

is  genuine  and  the  work  of  the  man  whose  name  is  associated 

with  it,  but  also  as  to  who  that  man  is,  seeing  that  it  is  an 

^  See  Charles,  The  Book  of  Enoch,  p.  42. 


I   JOHN  453 

anonymous  writing,  the  title,  of  course,  in  this  case,  as  in 

all  other  cases,  being  not  part  of  the  original  work.     And 

even  when  the  very  ancient  tradition  that  connects  it  with 

the  name  of   John   is  accepted,   we  are   still   able  to  ask 

which    John — the    apostle,   or    the    elder  ?i      It   is    almost 

certain   that  this  epistle  was  written  by  the  author  of  the 

fourth   gospel,   the   same   peculiar   style   and   special   ideas 

appearing  most  conspicuously  in  both. 

Among  phrases  which  connect  the  epistle  with  the  gospel  we  have 
frequent  references  to  life  and  truth,  and  such  expressions  as  "to  do 
the  truth,"  "  to  be  of  the  truth,"  "  to  be  of  God,"  "  to  be  of  the  world," 
"to  be  of  the  devil,"  "to  have  eternal  life,"  "to  conquer  the  world" 
(compare  i  John  iv.  4  ff.  with  John  xvii.  14) ;  "  th«  only  begotten  Son" 
(compare  i  John  iv.  9  with  John  i.  14,  18).  Pfleiderer^  following  Baur 
objects  (i)  that  the  "antichrists"  of  the  epistle  (ii.  18)  do  not  appear 
in  the  gospel ;  (2)  that  IXaafids,  twice  applied  to  Christ  in  the  epistle 
(ii.  2 ;  iv.  10),  does  not  occur  in  the  gospel.  But  can  we  argue  thus 
a  silentio,  when  there  is  no  proof  that  the  gospel  had  ^occasion  to 
introduce  these  ideas?  Besides,  the  gospel  describes  ChrTst  as  "the 
Lamb  of  God,  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world"  (John  i.  29), 
which  really  contains  the  l\aati6s  idea.  Further,  in  the  epistle  the 
Paraclete  is  Christ  (i  John  ii.  i),  while  in  the  gospel  He  is  the  Holy 
Ghost  (John  xiv.  16).  But  then  in  the  gospel  the  Holy  Ghost  is  described 
as  "another  Paraclete,"  which  implies  that  Christ  too  is  a  Paraclete. 
It  is  true  there  is  a  difference  in  the  ideas  of  the  Paraclete — in  the  epistle 
Christ  is  our  advocate  with  the  Father,  in  the  gospel  the  Holy  Ghost 
directly  helps  us ;  but  there  is  no  inconsistency  here. 

This  makes  the  importance  of  the  authorship  of  the  epistle 
very  great.  But  since  what  has  been  already  considered  in 
regard  to  the  gospel  applies  to  the  epistle,  and  since  it  was 
necessary  to  refer  to  this  work  when  discussing  questions 
concerning  the  gospel,^  we  need  not  go  over  the  ground 
again.  It  is  sufficient  to  notice  certain  points  specifically 
related  to  the  epistle.  Though  the  author  nowhere  designates 
himself  an  apostle,  he  claims  to  be  an  eye-witness  of  the 
gospel  events  and  a  personal  disciple  of  Jesus  Christ  (i.  1-3) ; 
and  he  writes  with  authority  and  fatherly  affection  for  his 
readers.  Very  early  testimony  connects  the  work  with  John, 
the  son  of  Zebedee,  and  there  is  no  ancient  witness  for  any 
other  authorship.  The  epistle  was  known  to  Polycarp  and 
Papias.     Irenaeus  is  the  first  to  cite  it  by  name.     It  is  in  the 

^  See  page  337.        *  Urchrisienihum,  pp.  791  ff.         *  See  page  328  ff. 


454  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Muratorian  Fragment.     Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen,  and 
Tertullian  referred  it  to  John. 

Polycarp  writes  :  ' '  For  whosoever  does  not  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  has 
come  in  the  flesh  is  antichrist  {Ad  Phil.,  7),  plainly  derived  from  i  John 
iv.  3.  Eusebius  says  that  Papias  "made  use  of  testimonies  {/cexpTyrat 
6'  6  ah-b%  fiaprvplais)  from  the  first  epistle  of  John."  {H.E.,  iii.  39.) 
Irenjeus  writes  :  '*  For  this  reason  he  (John)  thus  testified  to  us  in  his 
epistle:  Little  children,  it  is  the  last  time,"  etc.  {Adv.  Haer.^  iii.  16.  5. 
Compare  i  John  ii.  18.)^ 

The  apostolic  authorship  of  the  epistle  has  been  objected 
to  on  the  ground  of  its  alleged  "feebleness."  That  there 
is  great  simplicity  in  the  phrasing  may  be  allowed,  and  also 
that  there  is  a  habit  of  repetition,  which  may  be  set  down 
to  the  advanced  age  of  the  writer,  is  also  not  to  be  denied. 
And  yet  we  must  not  be  deluded  into  the  supposition  that 
the  underlying  thought  is  not  of  great  value.  We  have  here 
some  of  the  most  precious  teaching  of  the  N.T.,  e.g.^  con- 
cerning the  love  of  God,  brotherly  love,  Christ's  propitiation 
for  sin,  eternal  life.  Then  it  has  been  objected  that  second 
century  gnosticism  is  referred  to.  It  is  true  the  author 
contends  against  Docetism,  the  teaching  that  denied  the 
corporal  reality  of  the  incarnation  (iv.  2) ;  but  he  makes 
no  allusion  to  the  specific  ideas  of  the  great  gnostic  systems 
of  Valentinus  and  Basilides,  who  wrote  early  in  the  second 
century.  The  error  he  contends  against  may  be  that  of 
Cerinthus,  which  appeared  during  the  hfetime  of  St.  John.^ 

b.  Date  and  Place  of  Writing. — i  John  was  written  in 
a  time  of  peace,  as  it  contains  no  allusion  to  persecution. 
The  references  to  doctrinal  error  suggest  a  late  date  in  the 
apostolic  era.  Avoiding  the  Domitian  persecution,  we  must 
assign  it  either  to  an  earlier  period,  or  more  probably  to  the 
time  after  that  persecution  was  over  in  St.  John's  extreme 

^  See  also  Adv.  Haer.,  iii.  16.  8 ;  for  Clement  see  Strom,  ii.  15; 
Paedag.y  iii.  11 ;  for  Origen  see  Eusebius,  H.E.,  vi.  25 ;  De  Orat.^  0pp., 
tom.  i.,  p.  233  ;  for  Tertullian  see  Adv.  Prax.,  15. 

^  Baur  thought  he  saw  a  reference  to  Montanism  in  the  "sin  unto 
death"  (i  John  v.  16),  corresponding  with  the  mortal  sins  described 
by  Tertullian  {De  Pudic.^  19).  But  might  not  Montanism  seek  its  authority 
in  this  very  passage  ? 


I  JOHN  455 

old  age.     It  gives  no  hint  of  any  locality  where  it  was  written. 
Probably  it  came  from  Ephesus,  since  John  lived  there. 

c.  Ferso?is  Addressed  and  Occasion  of  Writing. — This  book 
is  not  in  the  form  of  a  letter,  and  yet  it  is  not  like  a  treatise, 
as  some  have  said,  for  it  contains  direct  hortatory  appeals. 
We  can  better  compare  it  to  a  pastoral,^  especially  aimed 
at  correcting  false  ideas  about  the  incarnation,  but  largely 
practical,  to  inculcate  obedience  to  the  commandments  of 
Christ,  and  brotherly  love. 

d.  Contents. 

i.  1-4,  Introduction,  promising  to  give  the  readers  the 
knowledge  of  the  Word  of  Life,  of  which  the  writer  has  had 
personal  experience. 

5-10,  The  message  that  God  is  light,  and  our  fellowship 
with  Him  dependent  on  walking  in  light.  Still  if  we  confess 
sin,  it  will  be  forgiven  through  the  blood  of  Christ. 

ii.  1-6,  Christ  the  propitiation,  whom  we  know  if  we  keep 
His  commandments. 

7-1 1,  The  old  commandment,  and  the  new.  Love  of 
one's  brother  a  necessary  condition  of  walking  in  the  light. 

12,  13,  The  messages  to  children,  fathers,  young  men. 

14-17,  On  the  vanity  of  loving  the  world. 

18-23,  Antichrist  and  the  denial  of  Christ. 

24-29,  Abiding  in  Christ. 

iii.  1-3,  The  love  of  God  in  calling  us  His  children,  and  its 
purifying  hope. 

4-12,  Christ  manifested  to  take  away  sin,  and  lead  us 
to  love  one  another,  in  the  opposite  character  to  Cain's. 

13-22,  Love  of  the  brethren  the  sign  that  we  have  passed 
from  death  into  life. 

23,  24,  The  commandments  to  believe  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  and  love  one  another. 

iv.  1-6,  Trying  the  spirits. 

7-16,  The  duty  to  love  another,  because  God  is  love. 

17-21,  The  perfecting  of  love,  and  its  victory  over  fear. 

V.  1-5,  The  victory  over  the  world  through  faith  in  Christ. 
*  See  Westcott,  The  Epistles  of  St,fohny  Introd.,  p.  30. 


456  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTIOxN 

6-13,  The  three  witnesses  and  life  eternal  in  Christ. 

14-17,  Prayer  for  the  sinner. 

1 8-2 1,  The  new  life  in  God  and  in  His  Son. 

6.  2  Jolm. 

a.  Authorship. — The    writer    describes   himself    as   "the 

elder,"  but  without  giving  any  name.     Therefore  some  ^  have 

assigned  this  epistle  and  3  John,  which  is  similar  in  address, 

to  the  presbyter  John,  even  while  allowing  i  John  to  be  by 

the  apostle.     But  the  resemblance  in  style  between  the  three 

epistles  is  too  close  to  allow  of  the  probability  of  diversity  of 

authorship.     As  2  John  has  no  name,  it  could  not  in  any  case 

be  called  "a  forgery,"  and  it  is  too  simple  and  practical  to 

admit  of  any  question  of  its  genuineness.     It  has  very  early 

attestation  to  its  connection  with  the  name  of  John,  certainly 

in  Irenaeus,  probably  in  the  Muratorian  Fragme?it. 

Irenaeus  certainly  quotes  verse  7  of  this  epistle,  though  with  an  ex- 
pression that  might  suggest  his  only  knowing  one  epistle  of  John,  saying, 
"And  John  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  in  his  epistle  .  .  .  when  he  says, 
for  many  deceivers  are  entered  into  the  world,  who  confess  not  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh ;  this  is  a  deceiver  and  an  antichrist."  {Adv. 
Haer.^  iii.  16.  8.)  The  Muratorian  Fragment  refers  to  two  epistles  of 
John.  Probably  this  is  one  of  them.  It  was  known  to  Clement'^  and 
Origen,'  who,  however,  while  admitting  that  John  wrote  the  first  epistle, 
expresses  doubts  as  to  his  authorship  of  the  second  and  third. 

b.  Destinatioti. — The  epistle  is  addressed  to  "the  elect 
lady."  *  It  is  a  question  whether  this  expression  is  to  be  taken 
literally,  or  figuratively  for  a  church.  In  favour  of  the  former 
interpretation  are  (i)  the  simplicity  of  the  epistle,  (2)  the 
references  to  the  elect  lady's  children  (verses  i,  4),  (3)  the 
analogy  of  3  John,  which  is  addressed  to  one  man,  Gaius,  (4) 
the  mention  of  the  elect  lady's  house  (verse  10).  On  the 
other  hand,  in  favour  of  the  latter  interpretation — understand- 
ing the  phrase  to  stand  figuratively  for  some  church — (i)  it 
must  be  allowed  that  the  purpose  and  contents  of  the  epistle 

^  See  e.g.y  Ebrard,  Com,  Introd. 
'^  Strom.,  ii.  15;  EusEBius,  H.E.^  vi.  14. 
3  EusEBius,  H.E.y  vi.  26. 

*  'EkXc/cttJ  /cup^jt,  which  might  also  be  rendered  either  "  the  elect  Kyria," 
"lady  Eclecte." 


2  JOHN  457 

are  more  suitable  to  that  application.  We  have  warnings 
against  antichrist  and  exhortations  to  love,  very  like  those 
in  I  John,  which  was  not  directed  to  a  private  person.  (2) 
John  not  only  refers  to  children  of  the  elect  lady  who  are  with 
her,  but  also  to  others  whom  he  has  met,  leading  us  to  think 
of  a  greater  number  than  the  children  of  one  woman.  (3) 
The  elect  sister  and  her  children  (verse  13)  seem  to  be 
another  church.  The  house  could  be  that  where  the  church 
met ;  churches  then  assembled  in  private  houses.  On  the 
whole,  therefore,  it  seems  best  to  take  the  expression  "elect 
lady  "  figuratively  as  the  half  playful  description  of  a  church. 

c.  Occasion^  Date^  and  Place  of  Writing. — The  special 
object  of  this  brief  letter  is  to  warn  the  "elect  lady  and 
her  children  "  against  deceivers  who  deny  the  incarnation ;  at 
the  same  time  they  are  exhorted  to  keep  to  the  original  com- 
mandments, especially  that  of  brotherly  love.  There  is  no 
reason  to  doubt  the  tradition  that  puts  this  epistle  after 
I  John ;  but  the  similarity  of  tone  suggests  that  it  was  written 
about  the  same  time,  />.,  towards  the  end  of  the  first  century, 
and  probably  at  Ephesus. 

d.  Contents. 
1-3,  Salutation. 

4,  Thanksgiving  for  certain  of  the  elect  lady's  children 
whom  John  has  found  walking  in  the  truth. 

5,  6,  A  reminder  of  the  old  commandments,  especially  that 
requiring  brotherly  love. 

7-1 1,  The  antichrist  deceivers  who  deny  the  incarnation  not 
to  be  received  into  the  house  or  acknowledged  with  a  greeting. 

12,  The  writer,  expecting  to  visit  his  correspondents,  will  not 
say  more  now. 

13,  Final  salutation. 

7.  3  John. 

a.  Authorship. — This  epistle,  which  is  addressed  to  one 
man,  the  hospitable  Gaius,  opens  exactly  in  the  same  way  as 
its  predecessor,  the  writer  introducing  himself  simply  as  "  the 
elder."     It  is  not  much  referred  to  in  early  church  literature ; 


458  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

but  the  absence  of  any  doctrinal  statements  and  the  fact  that 
it  was  addressed  to  a  private  individual  account  for  the 
neglect  of  it.  There  is  no  good  reason  to  doubt  that  it  was 
written  by  the  author  of  2  John. 

Hilgenfeld  and  Holtzmann  follow  Baur  in  assigning  the  epistle  to  the 
author  of  2  John,  though  placing  it  in  the  second  century.^ 

It  was  known  to  Origen,  who  expressed  doubts  concerning  it  as  well  as 
concerning  2  John.  (Eusebius,  H.E.^  vi.  25.)  Eusebius  accepts  it,  though 
he  places  it  among  the  AntUegomeiia.  {H.E.^  iii.  25.)  It  is  in  the  Old 
Latin,  but  not  in  the  Peshitto. 

b.  Occasion^  Date^  and  Place  of  Authorship. — It  would 
appear  that  the  special  object  of  this  epistle  was  to  commend 
a  man  named  Demetrius  to  Gaius ;  so  that  it  may  be  regarded 
as  one  of  those  "letters  of  commendations"  that  were  used 
in  apostolic  and  later  times.^  Having  thus  occasion  to  write, 
John  avails  himself  of  it  further  to  congratulate  his  friend  on 
the  hospitality  this  good  man  is  practising  to  Christians  who 
come  to  him  as  strangers.  Referring  to  some  previous  letter 
that  he  has  sent  to  the  church,  he  sternly  rebukes  a  certain 
Diotrephes  for  his  ambition  and  tyranny.  This  epistle  may 
be  assigned  to  the  same  time  and  place  as  2  John,  /'.<?.,  towards 
the  end  of  the  first  century  at  Ephesus.  Some  persecution  has 
recently  been  experienced  (verse  7),  probably  that  of  Domitian. 

c.  Persons  Mentioned. — (i)  Gaius. — We  meet  with  a  Gaius 
at  Corinth,  (i  Cor.  i.  14.)  Possibly  the  same  man  is  referred 
to  in  Romans  xvi.  23,  as  that  was  written  from  Corinth.  Here 
St.  Paul  calls  him  "my  host."  The  common  characteristic 
of  hospitaUty  faintly  suggests  identity  with  our  Gaius.  But 
hospitality  was  common  in  the  early  church,  and  St.  Paul 
must  have  stayed  somewhere.  Besides,  this  epistle  comes 
quite  thirty  years  later  than  Romans.  We  also  meet  with  a 
Gaius  of  Macedonia  (Acts  xix.  29),  and  another  of  Derbe  in 
Lycaonia  (xx.  4).  The  name  was  common,  being  a  Greek 
form  of  the  Latin  "  Caius."  At  the  late  period  of  our  epistle 
most  likely  it  denotes  some  person  not  otherwise  known  to  us, 

^  See  also  JClicher,  Einldtungy  pp.  159,   160,  for  proofs  of  the 
common  authorship  of  the  two  episUes. 
*  e.g,^  see  2  Cor.  iii.  i. 


3  JOHN  459 

possibly  a  prosperous  Christian  in  whose  house  a  church  was 
accustomed  to  meet.  (2)  Diotrephes. — All  we  know  of  this 
man  is  what  the  epistle  suggests.  He  was  a  member  of  the 
church  with  which  Gaius  was  connected.  It  has  been  inferred 
that  he  was  a  presbyter,  and  though  no  title  is  given  him,  not 
only  the  fact  of  his  loving  the  pre-eminence — which  might  be 
the  case  with  any  ambitious  person — but  his  tyranny,  point  to  a 
post  of  influence.  This  man  was  going  about  maligning  the 
author  of  the  epistle,  and  generally  doing  his  worst  to  break 
up  the  church.  (3)  Demetrius.  —  Some  Christian  on  his 
travels  about  to  visit  the  place  where  Gaius  lives,  who  is 
therefore  commended  to  him  for  a  brotherly  reception  by 
the  church. 

d.   Contents. 

I,  Salutation  from  "the  elder"  to  Gaius. 

2-4,  Good  wishes  for  the  health  of  Gaius,  with  congratula- 
tions that  he  is  walking  "  in  the  truth." 

5-8,  The  hospitality  of  Gaius,  especially  to  fugitive  Chris- 
tians who  were  driven  from  their  homes  by  persecution. 

9-12,  The  opposition  of  the  ambitious  Diotrephes  and 
his  tyrannous  conduct,  both  in  refusing  admission  to  new 
comers  and  his  expulsion  of  members  from  the  church. 

13,  14,  Concluding  personal  matters  and  salutation. 

There  is  no  theology  in  this  epistle.  The  first  and  second 
epistles  have  much  common  Johannine  teaching.  They  dwell 
with  emphasis  on  the  Incarnation,  repudiating  any  who  deny 
that  Jesus  Christ  has  come  in  the  flesh  as  "antichrist."  It 
would  seem  that  the  "heresy"  was  that  of  Cerinthus,  who 
asserted  that  Jesus  was  a  man  on  whom  the  Christ,  or 
according  to  another  version,  the  Holy  Spirit,  descended 
at  His  baptism,  deserting  Him  at  the  crucifixion.  John 
insists  on  the  reality  of  the  Incarnation.  This  brings  us 
eternal  life,  which  is  in  God's  Son,  so  that  he  who  has  the  Son 
has  life,  and  he  who  has  not  the  Son  of  God  has  not  the  life. 
God  is  light  and  love.  Our  duty  is  to  walk  in  the  light  and 
in  love,  especially  in  that  love  of  our  brother  without  which 
we  cannot  love  God,  and  must  remain  in  darkness. 


CHAPTER  XL 
THE   REVELATION 


1.  Apocalyptic  Literature. 

2.  Authorship  and  Origin. 

History  of  Criticism.     Date. 


3.  Contents. 

4.  Structure  and  Interpretation. 


1.  Apocalyptic  Literature. 

The  Apocalypse  stands  apart  from  all  other  books  of  the 
N.T.,  with  none  of  which  we  can  compare  it.  Yet  it  is 
not  unique  in  literature.  In  external  form  and  style  it 
is  similar  to  some  works  that  were  much  read  and  highly 
valued  at  the  time  when  it  was  written.  There  were  a 
number  of  Jewish  Apocalypses,  and  these  were  followed  by 
several  Christian  Apocalypses. 

The  origination  of  this  literature  may  be  traced  back  to  the  book 
of  Daniel,  the  second  portion  of  which  may  be  regarded  as  the  earliest 
Apocalypse.  Recent  discoveries  have  brought  to  light  the  Book  of  Enochs 
the  Book  of  the  Secrets  of  Enochs  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  etc  among 
Jewish  works.  The  fragment  of  the  so-cz\\ta  Apocalypse  of  Peter  which 
we  possess  comes  from  a  later  time,  and  is  a  Christian  writing  of  the  same 
class. 

To  point  out  this  fact,  however,  is  not  to  put  our  book 

of  the  Revelation  on  a  level  with  the  contemporary  works, 

any  more  than  to  point  out  the  epistolary  form  of  St.  Paul's 

writings  is  to  place  those  writings  on  a  level  with  Cicero's 

or  Pliny's  letters.     Some  portions  of  Revelation  at  all  events 

command  our  reverence  as  among  the  loftiest,  most  inspired 

utterances  of  the  N.T. ;  and  the  book  as  a  whole  stands  quite 

apart  from  other  works  of  its  class  in  spiritual  significance, 

thus  justifying  its  place  in  the  Canon. 

2.  Authorship  and  Origin. 

The  Apocalypse  has  been  generally  assigned  to  the  apostle 
John,  and  regarded  as  a  record  of  the  visions  that  were  given 

460 


AUTHORSHIP  AND  ORIGIN  461 

to  him  from  heaven  while  he  was  an  exile  on  the  isle  of 
Patmos  in  the  reign  of  Domitian.  There  is  much  in  the 
book  itself  that  harmonises  with  this  popular  conception, 
and  in  our  own  day  till  quite  recently  the  apostolic  authorship 
was  universally  accepted  among  critics  of  all  schools.  But 
new  ideas  about  the  book  have  now  been  brought  up,  and 
old  objections  of  patristic  times  revived.  Therefore  we  need 
to  look  into  the  question  of  its  authorship  afresh. 

a.  The  Testimony  of  Antiquity. — This  book  is  one  of 
the  best  attested  of  early  times.  It  was  known  to  Justin 
Martyr  and  Irenaeus  as  the  work  of  the  apostle,  and  it 
was  admitted  by  Papias.  In  the  West  it  was  unanimously 
accepted  as  St.  John's.  It  was  slower  in  obtaining  full  recog- 
nition in  the  East. 

Justin  Martyr  writes:  "There  was  a  certain  man  among  us  whose 
name  was  John,  one  of  the  apostles  of  Christ,  who  prophesied  by  a 
revelation,"  etc.,  and  then  he  mentions  the  prediction  of  the  millennium. 
(Tryph.  8i.)  Irenseus  quotes  our  Revelation  as  from  "John  the  disciple 
of  the  Lord."  {Adv.  Haer.y  iv.  20.)  This  is  especially  important 
because  of  Irenaeus'  intimate  knowledge  of  John's  disciple,  Polycarp.^ 
Two  Cappadocian  bishops,  Andrew  and  Arethas,  probably  of  the  fifth 
century,  tell  us  that  Papias  looked  upon  the  book  as  inspired  {debwvevaTos:) 
and  credible  (dft67rto-ros).2  The  Apocalypse  was  accepted  by  the  churches 
of  Lyons  and  Vienne.  (Eusebius,  H.E.,  v.  i,  2.)  It  seems  to  have  been 
known  to  Hermas.*  Eusebius  cites  Melito  of  Sardis  as  acknowledging 
it  {H.E.,  iv.  26),  and  so  does  Jerome.  {De  Fir.  III.  24).  But  the 
Apocalypse  is  not  in  the  Peshitto.  It  was  rejected  by  the  Alogi,^  who 
also  rejected  the  gospel  of  John,  and  on  critical  grounds  denied  to  the 
apostle  by  Dionysius  of  Alexandria.  Eusebius  seems  to  accept  it  as 
the  apostle's,  and  as  among  the  undisputed  books  (d/xoXoyodfiepa,  //.£., 
iii.  25) ;  but  subsequently  he  suggests  that  it  may  have  been  written 
by  John  the  presbyter.  {H.E.^  iii.  39.) 

b.  Internal  Evidence. — The  book  claims  to  be  a  revelation 
which  God  gave  to  His  servant  John  (i.  i),  and  in  addressing 
the  seven  churches  the  writer  twice  calls  himself  John  (i.  4,  9). 
The  name  does  not  appear  in  the  body  of  the  work ;  but  we 
meet  with  it  once  again  in  the  last  chapter  (xxii.  8).    John  is 

1  See  page  330. 

'  See  Charteris  Canonicity,  pp.  338,  339. 

3   Vis.  i,  3.  2 ;  4.  I ;  ii.  2,  7  ;  ii.  4.  I ;  iii.  5.  I ;  iv.  I,  10 ;  2.  i ;  2.  4 ; 
Mand.  x.  3.  2. 
*  See  page  333, 


462  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

a  common  Jewish  name,  and  there  is  nothing  in  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  writer  to  fix  upon  Zebedee's  son  in  particular.  In 
fact  the  indications  are  rather  adverse  to  that  conclusion. 
St.  John's  habit  in  the  gospel  is  not  to  give  his  name  as  it  is 
given  here.  The  author  of  Revelation  never  refers  to  Christ  in 
the  way  so  intimate  a  friend  as  the  beloved  disciple  would 
naturally  be  expected  to  do,  but  remotely.  Then  he  never 
calls  himself  an  apostle,  and  he  mentions  the  "twelve 
apostles "  in  a  manner  that  does  not  include  himself  among 
them  (xxi.  14),  while  he  represents  the  angel  as  reckoning 
him  among  the  "prophets"  (xxii.  9),  who,  as  we  learn 
especially  from  the  DidachS^  were  an  order  in  the  Church 
quite  distinct  from  the  apostles.  Of  course,  in  writing  such 
a  book  as  Revelation,  John  the  apostle  could  be  designated 
a  prophet,  for  this  book  would  be  regarded  as  prophecy. 
Still,  if  we  had  not  the  evidence  of  ancient  writers  in  favour  of 
the  apostle,  there  would  be  no  sufficient  reason  why  we  should 
assign  the  book  to  Zebedee's  son,  and  considerable  reason 
for  relegating  it  to  some  other  author.  There  is  a  growing 
opinion  in  the  present  day  that  the  apostle  was  not  the 
author.  We  know  what  a  strong  tendency  there  was  in  the 
early  church  to  ascribe  works  by  unknown  or  obscure  writers 
to  apostles  and  other  well-known  men.^  If  we  could  allow 
this  to  be  the  case  with  Revelation,  the  serious  difficulty  of 
believing  that  the  same  man  wrote  the  fourth  gospel  would 
disappear,  and  we  should  have  one  great  stumbUng- block  to 
the  Johannine  authorship  of  that  work  removed.  Still 
the  question  cannot  be  considered  definitely  settled.  If 
the  apostle  did  not  write  Revelation,  the  most  Hkely  man 
to  be  its  author  is  the  presbyter  John,  a  contemporary  at 
Ephesus.2 

While  the  fourth  gospel  is  in  fairly  good  Greek,  Revelation  is  the  most 
Hebraistic  book  in  the  N.T.  It  even  contains  distinct  barbarisms  such  as 
the  nominative  case  for  the  accusative  (vii.  9),  and  the  accusative  for  the 
nominative  (xx.  2).     It  is  true  there  are  certain  resemblances  between  the 

1  It  is  a  fact  that  every  other  known  apocalypse  was  not  written  by  the 
person  to  whom  it  was  assigned. 

2  Known  to  us  from  Papias,  Eusebius,  H.E.^  iii.  39. 


AUTHORSHIP   AND  ORIGIN  463 

two  works.  In  Revelation  Christ  appears  twenty-five  times  as  the  Lamb 
(apvlov)  ;  in  John  He  is  the  "Lamb  of  God"  (but  &/xv6s,  another  Greek 
word,  John  i.  29).  So  he  appears  as  the  bridegroom  (Revelation  xix.  7  ; 
xxi.  2 — compare  John  iii.  29) ;  and  the  Loo-os  (Revelation  xix.  13  ;  compare 
John  i.  i).  But  then,  if  John  the  elder  is  the  author,  it  still  comes  from 
the  Johannine  school  at  Ephesus. 

c.  History  of  Criticis?n.  —  The  apostolic  authorship  of 
Revelation  was  not  only  denied  by  Epiphanius's  obscure 
Alogi,  of  whom  we  know  too  little  to  take  them  into  account, 
but  also  by  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  who  laid  down  the  lines 
that  subsequent  criticism  has  followed.  The  ground  taken  by 
Dionysius  was  the  marked  difference  of  style  between  the 
Apocalypse  and  the  gospel  of  John.  Accepting  the  gospel  as 
beyond  question,  the  Alexandrian  critic  decided  that  Revela- 
tion must  have  been  written  by  some  other  John.  In  support 
of  his  view  he  mentioned  the  fact  that  there  were  two  monu- 
ments or  tombs  in  Ephesus  with  the  name  of  John.^  But 
Httle  heed  was  paid  to  Dionysius's  argument  until  the  begin- 
ning of  the  present  century,  when  it  was  turned  round  by 
opponents  of  the  Johannine  authorship  of  the  fourth  gospel, 
and  used  to  discredit  that  work,  Baur  and  his  followers  in 
the  Tiibingen  school  accepting  Revelation  as  the  work  of  the 
apostle  John.  More  recently  doubts  have  been  thrown  on 
its  integrity,  and  through  the  analysis  of  its  contents  it  has 
been  suggested  that  they  come  from  various  sources,  some  of 
these  being  Jewish,  also  that  the  various  portions  of  it  bear 
evidence  of  having  been  written  at  different  times.  There  is 
a  growing  agreement  among  scholars  that  it  is  a  composite 
work.  Still  that  does  not  preclude  the  apostolic  authorship, 
because  the  apostle  may  have  used  the  work  of  previous 
apocalyptic  writers ;  neither  does  it  exclude  the  idea  that 
the  John  of  Revelation  is  presbyter  John. 

In  the  year  1882  Weizsacker  wrote  maintaining  that  Revelation  is  a 
compilation  containing  some  materials  of  a  very  early  date ;  and  he  was 
followed  by  Volker,  who  divided  the  work  into  five  parts,  written  at 
different  times.  Then  Vischer  started  the  idea  that  Revelation  was  a 
translation  into  Greek  of  a  Jewish  apocalypse  written  in  Hebrew  before 
A.D.  70,  the  introduction,  conclusion,  and  slight  interpolations  in  the  text 
being  added  by  a  Christian  writer  towards  the  end  of  the  century.     A 

1  Ixv-fjixoLTo..     EUSEBIUS,  lI.E.f  vii.  24,  25. 


464  BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 

Dutch  scholar,  Weyland,  worked  out  independently  a  similar  theory,  but 
looking  for  two  Jewish  sources,  one  of  the  time  of  Nero,  the  other  of  the 
time  of  Titus,  and  assigning  the  Christian  revision  to  the  age  of  Trajan. 
Pfleiderer  virtually  holds  to  Weyland's  position,  Sabatier  and  Schoen 
modified  these  theories  by  regarding  the  Apocalypse  as  a  Christian  work 
based  on  Jewish  predecessors.  The  question  is  elaborately  discussed  by 
Spitta,  who  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Christian  kernel  of  Revela- 
tion was  written  by  John  Mark  about  A.D.  60,  and  that  subsequently  a 
Christian  editor  united  this  work  with  two  Jewish  apocalypses — one  as 
early  as  Pompey  (63  B.C.),  the  other  of  the  time  of  Caligula.  In  the  year 
1895  Gunkel  introduced  a  new  element  into  the  discussion  by  tracing  back 
parts  of  Revelation  to  the  "  Tianiat  myth"  in  the  Babylonian  epic  of  the 
creation.  Chapter  xii.  in  particular  is  assigned  to  this  Babylonian  source, 
adopted  into  Jewish  traditions  before  it  passed  into  apocalyptic  literature. 
In  the  new  edition  of  Meyer's  Commentary^  Bousset  defends  the  unity  of 
the  book,  but  holds  that  it  was  based  on  previous  Jewish  writings,  agree- 
ing however  with  Gunkel  that  chapter  xii.  could  not  have  had  a  Jewish 
origin.  Harnack  considers  that  the  work  is  composite.  The  earlier 
stratum  he  holds  to  have  been  written  under  Nero  or  his  successor,  on 
the  evidence  of  Revelation  xvii.  9-1 1,  and  the  final  editing  done  in  the 
reign  of  Domitian.^  Among  English  and  American  writers  Professor 
Milligan  defended  the  unity  and  Christian  origin  of  the  book ;  and  Professor 
Briggs  regards  it  as  a  Christian  work,  but  composite  in  nature  as  follows  : 
Edition  i  has  the  Seals,  Trumpets  and  Bowls.  Edition  2  adds  the  Epistles. 
Edition  3  brings  in  the  Beasts  and  the  Dragon.  A  redactor  follows  with 
1.  1-3;  xxii.  18-20,  and  many  notes  inserted  throughout  the  work. 
McGiffert  and  Bacon  hold  that  the  author  made  large  use  of  earlier 
materials.^ 

d.  Date  and  Place  of  Origin. — If  we  are  to  accept  the  theory 
of  a  composite  nature  for  Revelation,  the  question  of  date  or 
dates  becomes  rather  complicated.  But  then  this  theory  will  ex- 
plain some  of  the  difficult  problems  about  the  subject.  Leaving 
out  of  reckoning  the  age  of  the  traditional  elements  which 
may  have  come  down  in  Jewish  circles  from  the  time  of  the 
Babylonian  captivity,  we  have  still  indications  of  several  dates. 
Chapter  xiii.  i-io  seems  to  point  to  the  time  of  Caligula,  in 
that  emperor*s  attempt  to  compel  the  Jews  to  worship  his 
image.  Possibly  also  all  the  Apocalypse  of  the  beasts  should 
be  assigned  to  that  time.  Then  xvii.  9-1 1  seems  to  set  the 
Apocalypse  of  the  Vials  in  the  reign  of  Nero  or  Galba,  accord- 
ing as  we  count  the  five  emperors  from  Julius  Caesar  or 
Augustus.  Next,  xi.  8  assumes  that  Jerusalem  is  still  stand- 
ing.    That  must  be  before  a.d.  70.     But  Professor  Ramsay 

*  ChronologiCy  vol.  i.,  pp.  245,  246,  679. 

^  Apos.  Age^  pp.  633  ff.  For  an  admirable  survey  of  the  recent  criticism 
see  American  Journal  of  Theology y  October,  1898. 


CONTENTS  465 

argues  that  the  hostility  to  Rome  and  the  picture  of  the 
church  under  persecution  point  to  a  still  later  period.^ 
This  would  lead  us  on  to  the  period  assigned  by  Irenseus, 
the  reign  of  Domitian,  about  a.d.  90,  or  a  little  later  for  the 
most  recent  portions  of  the  book.  There  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  the  vision  of  chapter  i.,  etc.,  was  in  Patmos,  as 
the  author  tells  us  (i.  9).  The  full  construction  of  the  book, 
weaving  in  the  earlier  with  the  later  materials,  may  be  set 
down  to  Ephesus,  where,  according  to  every  ancient  witness, 
both  Johns  were  living. 

3.  Contents.  > 

a.  Title  and  description^  i.  1-3. 

b.  The  Seven  Churches^  i.  4-iii.  22. 

i.  4-20,  The  vision  of  the  Son  of  man. 
ii.,  iii.,  The  letters  to  the  seven  churches. 

c.  The  Apocalypse  of  the  Seals ^  iv.  i-viii.  i. 

iv.,  v.,  The  vision  of  the  Divine  glory  and  of  the  Lamb  that 
was  slain. 

vi.  i-viii.  I,  The  opening  of  the  seven  seals.  The  sealing 
of  the  144,000.     The  innumerable  multitude. 

d.  The  Apocalypse  of  the  Trumpets^  viii.  2-xi.  19. 

viii.  2-5,  The  vision  of  the  seven  angels,  and  the  incense  of 
the  prayers  of  the  saints. 

6-ix.  21,  The  sounding  of  the  trumpets  and  the  woes  that 
follow. 

X.,  The  angel  with  the  little  book,  which  the  seer  is  to  eat. 

xi.  1-14,  The  measuring  of  the  temple.  The  two  witnesses. 
Great  woes  for  Jerusalem. 

14-19,  The  seventh  trumpet. 

e.  The  Apocalypse  of  the  Woman  and  the  Dragon^  xii.  (Said 
to  be  founded  on  a  Babylonish  myth.) 

f.  The  Apocalypse  of  the  Beasts^  xiii. 

g.  The  Lamb  with  the  144,000  redeemed.  God's  judgment 
and  mercy ^  xiv. 

*  Rev.  vi.  9,  II ;  vii.  14 ;  xii.  11 ;  xiii.  15  ;  xvi.  6  ;  xvii.  6 ;  xviii,  24 ; 
XX.  4,  etc.     See  The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire^  pp.  295-302. 

2   H 


466  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

h.   The  Apocalypse  of  the  Viah^  xv.-xvi. 

XV.  1-4,  The  victors'  song  of  triumph. 

5-xvi.  21,  The  outpouring  of  the  seven  vials. 

i.  The  Fall  of  Babylon^  xvii.-xx.  (Prophecy  referring  to 
Rome  and  the  emperors.) 

xvii.,  The  beast  with  the  seven  heads  and  ten  horns. 

xviii.,  The  overthrow  of  Babylon. 

xix.,  The  war  of  the  Word  of  God  with  the  Beast. 

XX.,  Closing  scenes:  (i)  Millennial  peace;  (2)  outbreak  of 
Satan  ;  (3)  universal  judgment. 

j.   The  final  glory ^  xxi,  xxii. 

xxi.-xxii.  7,  The  heavenly  city. 

xxii.  8-21,  Admonitions  and  encouragements. 

4.  The  Structure  and  Interpretation  of  the  Book. 

a.  Its  Structure. — The  composite  nature  of  Revelation 
already  referred  to  seems  to  be  indicated  at  the  very  com- 
mencement. It  has  three  introductions:  (i)  i.  1-3  is  an 
introduction  to  the  whole  book ;  (2)  i.  4-8  is  an  introduction 
to  the  letters  to  the  seven  churches ;  (3)  i.  9  also  indicates  a 
fresh  beginning.  Then  the  letters  to  the  seven  churches  are 
wholly  different  from  the  succeeding  visions.  There  is  much 
in  this  part  of  the  book  that  harmonises  with  the  last  two 
chapters,  where  John's  name  occurs  again.  These  portions 
contain  some  of  the  most  valuable  inspired  utterances  of  the 
N.T.  It  is  when  we  come  to  deal  with  the  central  portions  of 
the  book  that  our  difficulties  begin.  Here  also  we  come  upon 
hymns  of  the  church,  references  to  the  Lamb,  allusions  to 
Christian  martyrdom,  and  other  signs  that,  wherever  the  author 
obtained  his  materials,  he  aimed  at  converting  the  whole  into 
one  work,  and  that  a  Christian  Apocalypse. 

b.  Interpretation. — Of  course  the  question  of  the  origin 
and  structure  of  the  book  must  govern  our  views  of  its 
interpretation.  If  pre-existing  Jewish  traditional  lore  and 
earlier  writings  were  used  by  the  author  as  materials,  we  are 
face  to  face  with  a  very  difficult  question  when  we  ask  how 
far  he  assimilated  those  materials,  and  gave  them  his  own 


INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  BOOK    467 

interpretation.  It  seems  almost  hopeless  to  go  farther  back 
and  ask  what  were  the  original  meanings  of  the  pre-existing 
materials.  But  in  regard  to  both  questions  of  interpretation 
we  are  helped  by  the  analogy  of  the  Jewish  Apocalypses 
that  have  been  preserved  to  our  own  day,  which  would 
lead  us  to  reject  the  notion  that  every  item  has  a  distinct 
mystical  or  symbolical  meaning.  Imagination  runs  riot  with 
the  elaborate  fancies  of  this  marvellous  book,  although 
perhaps  those  fancies  were  never  intended  to  be  interpreted 
prosaically  into  specific  significations.  Great  general  ideas 
run  through  the  succession  of  visions  —  seals,  trumpets, 
vials;  ideas  that  are  in  harmony  with  apocalyptic  literature 
generally,  and  the  same  recur  in  the  more  evidently 
Christian  portions  of  the  book.  It  was  always  in  some 
time  of  trouble  that  a  Jewish  Apocalypse  appeared,  and  then 
it  aimed  at  encouraging  the  sufferers  with  faith  in  God's 
final  judgment  of  their  foes  and  deliverance  of  His  people. 
Similar  ideas  run  through  our  N.T.  Apocalypse.  There  is 
present  persecution ;  a  great  conflict  is  impending ;  God  will 
interfere  through  His  angels;  Christ  will  come  to  smite 
and  judge  the  evil  powers  and  save  His  people.  We 
need  not  take  the  succession  of  visions  of  judgment  in 
chronological  sequence,  as  indicative  of  a  historical  series 
of  events.  The  same  idea  is  repeated  in  many  forms. 
Two  definite  historical  applications  appear  in  the  course 
of  the  book.  The  judgment  of  Jerusalem  (xi.),  written 
when  the  Jews  were  the  chief  enemies  of  the  Christians; 
and  the  judgment  of  Rome  (xvii.-xix.),  written  later  when 
Rome  was  their  antagonist.  But  for  the  rest  we  have  the 
ideas  of  conflict,  judgment,  and  deliverance  set  forth  again 
and  again  in  a  rich  variety  of  imagery  to  impress  upon  us 
their  force  and  truth. 

If  this  be  at  all  a  right  conception  of  the  nature  of  the  book,  it  will  be 
seen  that  the  various  popular  forms  of  exposition  are  out  of  keeping  with 
its  aim  and  meaning.  These  are  classified  as  follows  : — (i)  The  Prseterist, 
which  sees  all  the  references  to  events  in  the  past,  contemporary  or  almost 
contemporary  with  the  writing.  This  ignores  the  general  character  of 
apocalyptic  literature,  which  all  points  to  a  final  judgment,  yet  it  is 


468  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

right  with  regard  to  many  parts  of  the  Apocalypse.  (2)  The  Historical, 
which  takes  the  book  as  a  sort  of  chart  of  the  centuries  of  history 
down  to  our  time  and  beyond.  (3)  The  Futurist,  which  holds  that  all 
is  mysterious,  because  none  is  yet  fulfilled.  (4)  The  Ideal,  which  denies 
any  historical  references.  We  have  seen  that  there  are  definite  historical 
allusions  in  several  parts.  When  these  occur,  they  all  refer  to  con- 
temporary history,  and  give  no  justification  for  the  second  school  of 
interpretation.  The  third  school  is  so  far  correct,  that  a  final  judgment 
is  contemplated.  Yet  the  same  process  recurs  again  and  again  earlier — 
with  Jerusalem,  with  Rome,  with  any  city  or  people  similarly  situated,  on 
to  the  end  of  time,  when  at  last  Christ  will  triumph,  and  a  pure  and  happy 
state  of  society  prevail  among  men. 


APPENDIX  A 

EARLY  WITNESSES   TO   NEW  TESTAMENT 
WRITINGS 


Clement  of  Rome.     A  Bishop  of  Rome. 
Epistle  to  Corinthians       .        .    . 

[Barnabas.]    Epistle^  wrongly  attributed  to 
Barnabas     .  .  ... 


c.  A.D.  95. 


.    .    between  a.d.  96  and 
120. 
Didach^.     "The  Teaching  of  the  Twelve 

Apostles,"  an  ancient  church  manual  c  A.D.  100. 

Hermas.      The    Shepherd^    an    allegorical 

work  .  .  ... 

Ignatius.    Bishop  of  Antioch  and  Martyr. 

7  epistles     .  .  ... 

Marcion.     From  Pontus,  formed  his  own 
Canon  .  .  ... 


c.  A.D.  130-160. 


C.  A.D.  115. 


A.D.  144. 


ob.  A.D.  155. 

middle  of  2nd  cent. 


Polycarp.  Bishop  of  Smyrna  and  Martyr. 
Epistle  to  Philippians        .        .    . 

Epistle  to  Diognetus.    Anonymous      .    . 

Papias.  Bishop  of  Hierapolis.  Exposition 
of  the  Oracles  of  the  Lord.  Only 
fragments,  preserved  by  Eusebius    middle  of  2nd  cent 

Justin  Martyr.  Apologist,  i  and  2  Apolo- 
gies and  Dialogue  with  Trypho 

Tatian.  Assyrian  writer  and  disciple  of 
Justin  Martyr.  Diatessaron^  a  har- 
mony of  the  gospels  .        .    . 

Theophilus.     Of  Antioch^  Ad  Autolicum  . 
Irenseus.    At  Lyons  and  Vienne.    Against 

Heresies      .  .  ... 

469 


A.D.  155. 

A.D.  160-170. 
C.  A.D.  180. 

A.D.  180. 


470 


BIBLICAL  INTRODUCTION 


Hippolytus.  At  Rome.  Refutation  of  all 
Heresies      .  .  ... 

Clement  of  Alexandria.  Head  of  the 
Catechetical  school.  PcedagogiiSi 
Miscellanies^  etc.    .  ... 

Origen.  Clement's  successor  at  Alexandria, 
a  learned  and  voluminous  writer    . 

Dionysius.  Bishop  of  Alexandria  and 
teacher  after  Origen  .        .    . 

Tertullian.     North  Africa.    Many  writings 

Eusebius.  Bishop  of  Ccesarea  in  the  reign 
of  Constantine.  Ecclesiastical  His- 
tory^ etc.      .  .  ... 

Muratorian  Fragment.  A  fragment  of  a 
Canon  of  the  N.T.  named  after  its 
discoverer  Muratori  .        .    . 

Peshitto.  The  Syriac  popular  version  of 
the  N.T.,  probably  preceded  in  part 
by  other  versions    .  ... 

Old  Latin.  A  North  African  version,  older 
than  Tertullian       .  ... 

Vulgate.     Latin  version,  revised  by  Jerome 


end  of  2nd  cent 

end  of  2nd  cent 
first  half  of  3rd  cent 

A.D.  248. 

end  of  2nd  and  be- 
ginning of  3rd  cent 

early  4th  cent 
c.  A.D.  170. 


second  half  of  2nd 
cent 

middle  2nd  cent 
early  5  th  cent 


APPENDIX  B 

HAMMURABI   (AMRAPHEL) 

The  most  important  discoveries  of  inscriptions  of  late  years,  as 
far  as  the  Old  Testament  is  concerned,  are  those  connected  with 
the  Babylonian  King  Hammurabi,  c.  B.C.  2300,  especially  the  laws 
engraved  on  the  broken  portions  of  a  block  of  black  diorite, 
once  forming  a  monument  about  eight  feet  high.  This  important 
discovery  was  made  in  January,  1902.  Hammurabi  is  very 
commonly,  though  by  no  means  universally,  identified  with  the 
Amraphel  of  Genesis  xiv.  The  monument  just  mentioned  con- 
tains about  3,600  lines  of  inscription  in  forty-four  columns,  including 
a  legal  code  of  nearly  300  ordinances.  There  are  parallels  with 
the  Pentateuch  which  have  suggested  that  some  of  its  authors 
were  acquainted  with  Hammurabi's  laws,  but  the  similarities 
hardly  warrant  such  a  conclusion.  This  and  other  recent  dis- 
coveries confirm  the  view  already  held,  that  Babylon  in  this  era 
had  attained  a  high  level  of  civilisation  and  exercised  a  dominant 
influence  in  Western  Asia.  They  do  not  confirm  the  historicity 
of  Genesis  xiv.,  except  to  the  extent  stated  on  pp.  61,  62. 


471 


APPENDIX   C 

WISDOM   LITERATURE 

JOB^  Proverbs^  and  Ecclesiastes^  together  with  the  Apocryphal" 
Ecclesiasticus  and  Wisdom  of  Solomon^  are  often  spoken  of  as  the 
"Wisdom  Literature,"  from  their  references  to  "Wisdom,"  or 
Khochviah.  They  are  the  nearest  approach  in  the  Old  Testament 
to  Philosophy  and  the  speculative  discussion  of  Theology,  though 
they  also  include  other  material ;  e.g..^  the  narratives  in  Job.  On 
the  other  hand,  there  are  sections  of  other  O.T.  books  which 
might  be  included  in  the  Wisdom  Literature,  notably  Psalm  Ixxiii. 
and  the  Psalms  included  in  §  IV.,  p.  149.  Similar  material  is 
found  in  some  of  the  Rabbinical  writings,  especially  in  the  most 
ancient,  the  Pirqe  Aboth^  or  Sayings  of  the  Fathers^  portions  of 
which  may  be  pre-Christian. 

On  the  meagre  and  ambiguous  evidence  of  a  few  references 
to  "  the  Wise  "  in  the  O.T.  a  theory  has  been  built  up  of  a  class  of 
scholars  who  studied  and  wrote  about  "  Wisdom  "  even  before  the 
exile  ;  but  it  may  be  doubted  whether  this  species  of  literature  was 
not  a  post-exilic  development  in  Israel,  succeeding  to  and  not 
contemporaneous  with  Prophecy. 


m 


APPENDIX  D 

THE   RECENT   CRITICISM   OF  THE   BOOK   OF 
JEREMIAH 

This  criticism  consists  largely  of  the  independent  discussion 
of  numerous  sections,  some  very  short.  Some  references  have 
been  made  to  it  in  the  account  of  the  contents,  pp.  200  ff. ;  but 
these  numerous  discussions,  involving  endless  details,  cannot  be 
summed  up  in  any  concise  elementary  statement.  It  is  generally 
admitted  (a)  that  much  of  the  book  comes  directly  from  Jeremiah, 
or  indirectly  chiefly  through  Baruch ;  and  that  much  that  is  told 
of  the  prophet  is  also  from  Baruch,  and  is  substantially  historical ; 
and  (d)  that  there  are  additions  which  are  not  directly  or  indirectly 
from  Jeremiah  or  Baruch.  Scholars,  however,  differ  widely  as  to 
the  distribution  of  material  between  (a)  and  {d).  Apart  from 
shorter  passages,  the  following  are  very  commonly  assigned  to 
{b—Non-Jereviianic  sections) : — x.  1-16,  xvii.  19-27,  xxxiii.  17-26, 
xxxix.  1-13,  l.-lii.  According  to  some  critics,  xlvi.-xlix.,  or  large 
portions  of  them,  would  also  belong  to  ip). 

Cornill,  in  his  Hebrew  Text  of  Jeremiah  in  Dr.  Paul  Hampt's 
Sacred  Books  of  the  Old  Testament^  distributes  the  book  thus  : — 

(«)*  Contents  of  the  Roll^  mentioned  in  xxxvi.  32. 

i.-viii. ;  ix.  1-22;  x.  17-24;  xi. ;  xii.  1-6;  xviii. ;  xxv.  I-29; 
xlvi.  1-12  ;   xlvii.  f. ;   xlix.  1-33. 

(^)*  Other  utterances  of  feremiah. 

ix.  23-25;  xii.  7-17;  xiii.-xvii.;  xx.-xxiv.;  xxix.-xxxii.;  xxxiii.  1-13; 
XXXV. ;  xlvi.  13-20 ;  xlvii. ;  xlviii. ;  xlix.  34-39. 

*  N.B. — From  the  passages  in  (a)  and  (3)  must  be  excepted  many 
interpolations,  the  more  important  of  which  are  enumerated  below  in  if). 

{d)  Sections  not  by  feremiah. 

X.  1-16 ;  XV.  11-14 ;  xvii.  19-27  ;  xix. ;  xx.  1-6 ;  xxv.  4-6,  12-14, 
30-38;  xxvi.-xxviii. ;  xxix.  2,  16-31 ;  xxx.  10,  ii,  22-24;  xxxi.  10-14, 
35-37;  xxxii.  1-5,  17-23;  xxxiii.  2,  3,  11-26;  xxxiv. ;  xxxvi.-xlv. ; 
xlviii.  21-34,  45-47  ;  l.-lii. 

473 


LIST  OF  BOOKS 

TO  WHICH  THE  STUDENT  IS  REFERRED 
FOR   FURTHER  INFORMATION 

Considerations  of  space  necessitate  the  exclusion  of  many 
excellent  works;  there  is  only  room  for  a  representative 
selection.  Untranslated  foreign  works  are  only  mentioned 
where  no  satisfactory  book  of  precisely  the  same  character 
is  accessible  in  English. 

A.    General. 

1.  Bibliography. — Introduction  to  Theology  and  its   Literature, 

Alfred  Cave,  d.d.    (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 

2.  Bible  Dictionaries. — A  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  edited  by  James 

Hastings,  d.d.     (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 

Encyclopaedia  Biblica,  edited  by  T.  K.  Cheyne,  D.D.    (A.  and  C. 
Black.) 

3.  Concise   Handbooks.  —  Cambridge    Companion    to   the    Bible. 

(Camb.  Univ.  Press.) 

How  to  Read  the  Bible,  by  W.  F.  Adeney.     (James  Clarke.) 

Primer  of  the  Bible,  W.  H.  Bennett.     (Methuen.) 

A  Guide  to  Biblical  Study,  by  A.  S.  Peake.  (Hodder  and  Stoughton.) 

4.  Geography  of  Pales line.—S'msii  and  Palestine,  by  A.  P.  Stanley. 

Historical  Geography  of  the  Holy  Land,  by  Prof.  G.  A.  Smith. 

(Hodder  and  Stoughton.) 
Names  and  Places  in  O.  and  N.T.,  by  G.  Armstrong.    (Pal.  Expl. 

Fund.) 

Publications  and  Maps  of  Pal.  Expl.  Fund. 

Geographic  des  Alten  Palastina,  by  D.  F.  Buhl.    (J.  C.  B.  Mohr, 
Leipzig.) 

474 


LIST  OF  BOOKS  475 

5.  Archeology, — Antiquities  of  Israel,  by  H.  Ewald.    (Longmans.) 
Lehrbuch  der  Hebraischen  Archaologie,  by  W.  Nowack.    (J.  C. 

B.  Mohr,  Leipzig.) 
Hebraische  Archaologie,  by  J.  Benzinger.    (J.  C.  B.  Mohr.) 
Manners  and  Customs  of  the  Modern  Egyptians,  by  E.  W.  Lane. 

(Murray,  1871.) 
Arabian  Nights. 

The  Land  and  the  Book,  by  W.  M.  Thomson. 
Travels  in  Arabia  Deserta,  by  C.  M.  Doughty. 


B.    Old  Testament. 

Books  written  more  or  less  on  the  lines  of  traditional  criticism  are 
enclosed  in  brackets  ( )  j  the  critical  position  of  the  rest  is  substantially 
that  of  the  O.T.  section  of  this  book,  or  else  the  books  or  subjects  dealt 
with  do  not  raise  serious  critical  questions,  or  are  treated  without  special 
reference  to  such  questions. 

1.  Canon.— The    Canon    of  the    O.T.,   by   Prof.    E.    H.   Ryle. 

(Macmillan.) 

2.  Text.—h  Short  History  of  the  Hebrew  Text  of  the  O.T.,  by 

T.  H.  Weir.    (Williams  and  Norgate.) 
Introduction  to  the  Hebrew  Bible,  by  C.  D.  Ginsburg,  Trinitarian 
Bible  Soc. 

3.  History.— '^xsX.drj    of    Israel,    by    H.    Ewald,    $    vols.,    tr. 

(Longmans.)^ 
Lectures  on  the   Hist,   of   the  Jewish  Ch.,  by  A.   P.   Stanley, 

3  vols.     (Murray.)^ 
History  of  the  Hebrews,  by  R.  Kittel  (applying  Dillmann's  critical 

views),  tr.    (Williams  and  Norgate.) 

History  of   the   People  of   Israel,  by  Prof.   C.   H.   Cornill,  tr. 
(Kegan  Paul.) 

Histoire  du  Peuple  d'Israel,  by  C.  Piepenbring.     (Williams  and 
Norgate.) 

History  of  Israel,  by  J.  Wellhausen,  tr.    (A.  and  C.  Black.) 

Old  Testament  History,  by  H.  P.  Smith.    (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 

^  Representing  the  transition  from  traditional  to  modern  criticism. 


476  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Old  Testament  History,  by  G.  W.  Wade.    (Methuen.) 

History  of  the  Hebrews,  by  R.  L.  Ottley.    (Camb.  Univ.) 

The  Biblical  History  of  the  Hebrews,  by  Foakes-Jackson,  F.  J. 
(Heffer.) 

4.  /nfroduaion.— Introduction  to  the  Lit.  of  the  O.T.,  by  Prof. 

S.  R.  Driver.    (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 

Outline  of  the  Hist,  of  the  Lit.  of  the  O.T.,  by  Prof.  E.  Kautzsch, 
tr.    (Williams  and  Norgate.) 

O.T.  in  the  Jewish  Ch.,  by  W.  Robertson  Smith.     (A.  and  C. 
Black.) 

5.  T/teoio^.— {Theology   of   the    O.T.,   by   G.    F.    Oehler,   tr.) 

(T.  and  T.  Clark.) 

O.T.  Theology,  by  H.  Schultz,  tr.    (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 
Theology  of  O.T.,  by  C.  Piepenbring,  tr.    (New  York.) 
Theology  of  O.T.,  by  W.  H.  Bennett.     (Hodder  and  Stoughton.) 
Lehrbuch  der  Alt-Testamentlichen    Religionsgeschichte,  by   R. 
Smend.    (J.  C.  B.  Mohr,  Freiburg  i.  B.) 

6.  Assyrian  and  Egyptian  Inscriptions^  etc. — History,  Prophecy, 

and     the     Monuments,    by    J.     P.     McCurdy,    3    vols. 
(Macmillan.) 
The  Cuneiform  Inscriptions  and  the  O.T.,  by  E.  Schrader,  tr. 
(Williams  and  Norgate.) 

(The   Higher  Criticism  and  the  Monuments,  by  A.  H.  Sayce, 

S.P.C.K.)! 
Life  in  Ancient  Egypt,  by  A.  Erman,  tr.    (Macmillan.) 
Authority  and  Archaeology,  by  S.  R.  Driver,  etc.     (Murray.) 
Light  from  the  East,  by  C.  J.  Ball.     (Eyre  and  Spottiswoode.) 

Explorations  in  Bible  Lands  during  the  Nineteenth  Century,  by 
H.  V.  Hilprecht.    (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 

The  Seven  Tablets  of  Creation,  by  L.  W.  King.    (Luzac.) 

The  Ancient  East  (Series  of  Booklets).    (Nutt.) 

The  Laws  of  Moses  and  the  Code  of  Hammurabi,  by  S.  A.  Cook. 
(Black.) 

*  But  accepts  most  of  the  principles  and  many  of  the  results  of  modern 
criticism. 


LIST   OF   BOOKS  477 

The  Oldest  Code  of  Laws  (Hammurabi),  by  C.  H.  W.  Johns. 
(T.  and  T.  Clark.) 

7.  Commentaries i  etc. — Abbreviations,  etc. :  (a)  Works  on  introduction, 
(b)  Complete  commentaries  for  advanced  students,  (c)  Concise  com- 
mentaries for  English  readers,  etc.  (d)  Expository  works,  which  do 
not  include  a  complete  detailed  commentary.  (e)  Works  in  which 
the  text  is  arranged  so  as  to  show  the  analysis  into  earlier  documents, 
including  some  notes,  but  not  a  complete  commentary. 

C.B.,  Century  Bible  (T.  C.  and  E.  C.  Jack) ;  C.B.S.,  Cambridge  Bible 
for  Schools  and  Colleges  (Camb.  Univ.  Press) ;  E.B.^  Expositor's  Bible 
(Hodder  and  Stoughton) ;  H.B.C.^  Handbooks  for  Bible  Classes  (T.  and 
T.  Clark);  /.C,  International  Critical  Commentary  (T.  and  T.  Clark); 
P.  B. ,  Polychrome  Bible  (James  Clarke  and  Co. ). 

H,B.y  Kurzgefasstes  exegetisches  Handbuch  zum  Alten  Testament 
(S.  Hirzel,  Leipsic)  ;  H.C.^  Kurzer  Hand-Commentar  zum  Alten  Testa- 
ment (J.  C.  B.  Mohr,  Freiburg  i.  B.);  H,K.^  Hand-Kommentar  zum 
A.T.  (Vandenhoeck  and  Ruprecht,  Gottingen.). 

Pentateuch  (or  Hexateuch  =  Pent. -f- Josh.).^ 

(a)  The  Hexateuch,  by  Kuenen,  tr.    (Macmillan.) 

The  Higher  Criticism  of  the  Hexateuch,  by  C.  A.  Briggs.    (New 

York.) 
Einleitung  in  den  Hexateuch,  by  H.  Holzinger.    (J.  C.  B.  Mohr, 

Freiburg  i.  B.) 
Hebraica,  Papers  in,   1888,  v.-viii.,  by  W.  R.  Harper  and  (W. 

H.  Green). 
(The  Inspiration  of  the  O.T.,  by  Dr.  A.  Cave,  Congregational 

Union.) 
(The   Higher  Criticism  of   the  Pentateuch,  by  W.  H.  Green.) 

(Dickinson.) 
The  Hexateuch,  by  J.  E.  Carpenter  and  G.  Harford-Battersby. 

(Longmans.) 

Ce)  Documents  of  the  Hexateuch,  by  W.  E.  Addis,  2  vols.  (Nutt.) 
Genesis}— {}S)  Delitzsch,  tr.  (T.  and  T.  Clark);  Dillmann,  tr. 
(T.  and  T.  Clark) ;  Gunkel  {H.K.\  (c)  G.  W.  Wade ; 
S.  R.  Driver  (Methuen)  ;  W.  H.  Bennett  \CM,).  (d)  Marcus 
Dods  {E.B.).  (e)  The  Genesis  of  Genesis,  by  B.  W.  Bacon, 
Hartford,  U.S.A.  The  Composition  of  the  Book  of  Genesis, 
by  E.  I.  Fripp.  (Nutt.) 

*  Cf,  several  books.  ■  Cf,  Pentateuch. 


478  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Exodus.^— (h)  Exodus  and  Leviticus,  by  C.  V.  Ryssel  (H.B.); 
B.  Baentsch  (H,IC.).  (c)  James  Macgregor  {H.B.C.). 
(e)  The  Triple  Tradition  of  the  Exodus,  by  B.  W.  Bacon, 
Hartford,  U.S.A.,  all  Pent,  except  Genesis. 

Leviticus >—(^)  See  Exodus;  B.  Baentsch  {H.K.)\  Bertholet 
{H.C.).  (e)  See  Exodus;  also  S.  R.  Driver  and  H.  A. 
White  {P.B.). 

Numbers} — (b)  Numeri,  Deuteronomium  und  Josua,  by  A. 
Dillmann  {H.B.) ;  G.  B.  Gray  (/.C.) ;  B.  Baentsch  {H.K.). 
(e)  See  Exodus. 

Deuteronomy}— {h)  Driver  (/.C);  Bertholet  {//.€.);  Steuernagel 
(//.A'.),     (d)  A.  Harper  {E.B.).    (e)  See  Exodus. 

Joshua? — (b)    See   Numbers;    Steuernagel    {H.K.)\    Holzinger 

{H.C.).     (c)   J.  S.   Black  {Smaller  C.B.S.).     (e)   W.   H. 

Bennett  {P.B.). 
Judges.— {h)  G.  F.  Moore  (/.C.) ;  Nowack  {H.K.) ;  Budde  {H.C). 

(c)  J.  S.  Black  {Smaller  C.B.S.) ;  G.  W.  Thatcher  (CB.). 

(e)  G.  F.  Moore  {P.B.). 
Ruth,—{h)  A.  Bertholet,  in  Die  Fiinf  Megillot  {H.C.)  ;  Nowack 

{H.K.).     (c)  R.  Sinker,  in  Ellicott's  O.T.  Comm.  for  Eng. 

Readers.    (Cassell.) 
Samuel. — Notes  on  the  Hebrew  Text  of  the  Books  of  Samuel,  by 

Driver.   (Clarendon  Press.)    (b)  H.  P.  Smith  {I.C.) ;  Budde 

{H.C).    (c)  A.  F.  Kirkpatrick  {C.B.S.\  2  vols. 

Kings.— (b)  J.  Benzinger  {H.C.) ;  C.  F.  Burney  (Notes  on  the 
Hebrew  Text) ;  Kittel  (//.A-.),  (c)  J.  Skinner  (C.5.).  (d)  F. 
W.  Farrar  {E.B.). 

Chronicles.— {h)  Kittel  {H.K.)-,  Benzinger  {HC).  (c)  W.  E. 
Barnes  {C.B.S.).    (d)  W.  H.  Bennett  {E.B.). 

Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Esther.— {h)  C.  V.  Ryssel  {H.B.) ;  Siegfried 
{H.K.) ;  Bertholet,  Ez.  and  Neh.  {H.C).  (c)  H.  E.  Ryle, 
Ez.  and  Neh.  {CB.S.).    (d)  W.  F.  Adeney  {E.B.). 

joh,—{2})  T.  K.  Cheyne,  Job  and  Solomon ;  W.  T.  Davison, 
Wisdom  Literature  of  the  O.T.  (C.  H.  Kelly),  (b)  Duhm 
{H.C) ;  S.  Cox  (Kegan  Paul) ;  Budde  {H.K.).  (c)  A.  B. 
Davidson  {C.B.S.),  the  best  comm.  in  Eng. ;  E.  C.  S. 
Gibson  (Methuen).     (d)  R.  A.  Watson  {E.B.), 

^  Of.  Pentateuch.  "  Ibtd. 


LIST  OF  BOOKS  479 

Proverbs.— {h)  C.  H.  Toy  (/.C) ;  Wildeboer  {H.C.) ;  Frankenberg 
{H.K.).  (c)  Archd.  Perowne  (C.B.S.).  (d)  R.  F.  Horton 
{E.B.), 

Psalms.— (a)  T.  K.  Cheyne,  Origin  of  the  Psalter  (Kegan  Paul) ; 
W.  T.  Davison,  Praises  of  Israel  (C.  H.  Kelly),  (b) 
Cheyne  (Kegan  Paul) ;  Delitzsch  (T.  and  T.  Clark) ;  J.  S. 
Perowne  (Bell  and  Sons) ;  Duhm  {JI.C.) ;  Baethgen  {H.K.). 

(c)  A.  F.  Kirkpatrick,  3  vols.  (C.B.S.) ;  Wellhausen  (P.B.). 

(d)  A.  Maclaren  {E.B.),  3  vols. 

Ecclesiastes. — (a)  Cheyne  and  Davison,  as  on  Job.  (b)  G.  Wilde- 
boer, in  Die  Fiinf  Megillot,  see  Ruth ;  T.  Tyler  (Nutt) ; 
Siegfried  {H.K.).  (c)  E.  H.  Plumptre  {C.B.S.).  (d)  S.  Cox 
(E.B.)  ;  Koheleth,  by  T.  C.  Finlayson. 

Canticles  or  Song  of  Songs. — (b)  C.  D.  Ginsburg  (Longmans) ; 

Budde,  in  the  Fiinf  Megillot,  see  Ruth ;  Siegfried  {H.K,). 

(d)  W.  F.  Adeney,  Cant,  and  Lam.  {E.B.). 
The  Prophets} 

(a)  The  Prophets  of  Israel — Amos,  Hosea,  I.  Isaiah,  Micah — by 
W.  R.  Smith.    (A.  and  C.  Black.) 

The  Books  of  the  Prophets,  by  G.  G.  Findlay,  vol.  i. — Obadiah, 
Joel,  Isaiah  xv.,  xvi.,  Amos,  Zechariah  ix.-xiv.,  Micah. 
(C.  H.  Kelly.) 

The  Theology  of  the  Prophets,  by  A.  Duff— Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah, 
Micah.     (A.  and  C.  Black.) 

Isaiah} — (a)  Introduction  to  the  Book  of  Isaiah,  by  Cheyne 
(A.  and  C.  Black) ;  Isaiah,  etc.,  by  Driver  (Nisbet) ; 
(Isaiah  One  and  His  Book  One,  by  G.  C.  M.  Douglas), 
(Nisbet).  (b)  Cheyne,  2  vols.  (Kegan  Paul) ;  Delitzsch, 
2  vols.,  tr.  (T.  and  T.  Clark) ;  Duhm  {H.K.) ;  Marti  {H.C.). 

(c)  J.  Skinner,  2  vols.  (C.B.S.) ;  W.  E.  Barnes  (Methuen). 

(d)  G.  A.  Smith,  2  vols.  (E.B.).    (e)  Cheyne  {P.B.). 

Prophecies  of  Isaiah — pamphlet  on  Assyriology,  etc. — by  M.  L. 
Kellner,  Camb.,  U.S.A. 

Jeremiah, — (a)  Jeremiah,  etc.,  by  Cheyne.  (Nisbet.)  (b)  Cheyne, 
Exposition  in  Pulpit  Comm. ;  Giesebrecht  {H.K.) ;  Duhm 
{HC.y  (c)  A.  W.  Streane  {C.B.S.),  (d)  i.-xx.,  C.  J.  Ball 
Ie.B.)  ;  xxi.-lii.,  W.  H.  Bennett  {E.B.). 

*  Cf.  the  several  books.  ^  See  The  Prophets, 


480  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Lamentations. — (b)  Cheyne,  at  end  of  Jeremiah  ;  Budde,  in  the 

Fiinf  Megillot,  see  Ruth,    (c)  Streane,  at  end  of  Jeremiah. 

(d)  W.  F.  Adeney,  see  Canticles. 
Ezektel.—{h)   A.  Bertholet  (B.C.);    Kraetzschmar  (//.HT.).     (c) 

A.   B.   Davidson  (C.B.S.) ;    Toy  (P.B.).     (d)   J.   Skinner 

(E.B.). 
Daniel. — (a)  (The  Book  of  Daniel  from  the  Christian  Standpoint, 

by  John  Kennedy.     Eyre  and  Spottiswoode.)     (b)  A.  A. 

Bevan   (Camb.   Univ.   Press) ;    (J.   E.  H.   Thomson,  etc., 

Pulpit  Comm.),  (Kegan  Paul) ;  J.  D.  Prince  (Williams  and 

Norgate);   Betormaun  [H./C.)-,    Marti  {H.C.).     (c)   S.  R. 

Driver  {C.B.S.).     (d)  F.  W.  Farrar  {E.B.). 
The  Minor  Prophets.— i^)  Nowack  {H.K.) ;  Pusey  ;  Wellhausen 

(Skizzen  und  Vorarbeiten,  Part  V.,  Reimer,  Berlin),     (d) 

G.  A.  Smith,  2  vols.  {E.B.\ 
ffosea.^—{c)  Cheyne  (C.B.S.). 
Joel  and  Amos}— {^  Amos^  H.  G.  Mitchell  (Boston),    (c)  Driver 

(C.B.S.). 
Obadiah^  and  Jonah?— {c)  T.  T.  Perowne  {C.B.S.). 
Micah.^—{c)  Cheyne  (C.B.S.). 

Nahum^  Habakkuk^  and  Zephaniah?—(Q)  A.  B.  Davidson  (C.B.S.). 
Haggai^  Zechariah^  and  Malachi? — (c)  T.  T.  Perowne  (C.B.S.), 
Zechariah.—(h)  (C.  H.  H.  Wright).    (Hodder  and  Stoughton.) 

8.  Apocrypha^  Pseudepigrapha^  etc, 

Apocrypha,  in  "Speaker's   Comm.,"  by  H.  Wace,  etc.,  2  vols. 

(Murray.) 
Pseudepigrapha,  by  W.  J.  Deane.    (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 
Books  which  influenced  our  Lord,  etc.,  by  J.  E.  H.  Thomson. 

(T.  and  T.  Clark.) 
The  Age  of  the   Maccabees,  by  A.  W.   Streane.      (Eyre  and 

Spottiswoode.) 
Book  of  Wisdom,  by  W.  J.  Deane.    (Oxford.) 
Book  of  Enoch,  by  R.  H.  Charles.    (Oxford.) 
Book  of  the  Secrets  of  Enoch,  by  W.  R.  Morfill  and  R.  H. 

Charles.    (Oxford.) 

*  See  The  Prophets  and  The  Minor  Prophets. 
«  See  The  Minor  Prophets, 


LIST   OF  BOOKS  481 

Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  R.  H.  Charles. 

First  Maccabees,  W.  Fairweather  and  J.  S.  Black  (C.B.S.). 

Psalms  of  Solomon,  by  H.  E.  Ryle  and  M.  R.  James.     (Camb. 

Univ.  Press.) 
Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  by  R.  Sinker. 
Book  of  Jubilees,  by  R.  H.  Charles.    (Black.) 


C.    New  Testament. 

1.  Canon. — Canonicity,  by  Prof.  A.  H.  Charteris.    (Blackwood.) 
History  of  the  Canon,  by  Bishop  Westcott.     (Macmillan.) 
History  of  the  Canon,  by  Prof.  E.  Reuss.    (Eng.  trans.    Gemmell, 

Edinburgh.) 
Geschichte    des    Neutcstamentlichen    Kanons,    by    Th.    Zahn. 

(Erlangen  and  Leipzig.) 
Die  Chronologic  der  Altchristlichen  Litteratur,  by  Adolf  Harnack. 

(Leipzig.) 

2.  Text. — Novum  Testamentum  Graece,  with  full  critical  apparatus, 

by  Tischendorf,  8th  edit.    (Leipzig.) 
New  Testament  (Greek),  by  Westcott  and  Hort.    (Macmillan.) 
The  Greek  Text  of  the  Revised  Version.  (Oxford  University  Press.) 
Greek  Testament,  Revised  Text,  by  Nestle.    (British  and  Foreign 

Bible  Society.) 
The  Resultant  N.T.,  by  Dr.  Weymouth.    (Eliot  Stock.) 
Novum  Testamentum  Graece  cum  apparatu  critico  ex  editionibus 

et  libris  manu  scriptis  collecto^an  excellent  Gr,  N.T.  at  a 

low  price.    (Stuttgart.) 

3.  Textual  CV/Z/aj/w.— Prolegomena  to  Tischendorfs  N.T.,  by 

C.  G.  Gregory  (Latin).    (Leipzig.) 
Introduction  to  the  Criticism  of  the  N.T.,  by  Scrivener,  4th  edit, 

edited  by  Miller.    (Deighton  Bell.) 
Introduction    to    Westcott    and    Hort's    N.T.,    by    Dr.    Hort. 

(Macmillan.) 
Textual  Criticism  of  N.T.,  by  Prof.  B.  B.  Warfield,  D.D.  (TheoL 

Educator,  Hodder  and  Stoughton.) 
Handbook  to  the  Textual  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament,  by 

F.  G.  Kenyon.    (Macmillan  and  Co.) 
2  I 


4S2  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Textual  Criticism  of  the  Greek  Testament,  by  Nestle.    (Williams 
and  Norgate.) 

The  Text  of  the  N.T.,  by  K.  Lake.    (Oxford  Church  Text  Books, 
Rivingtons.) 

4.  History. — A  History  of  the  Jewish  People  in  the  Time  of 

Jesus  Christ,  by  E.   Schiirer.     (Eng.   trans.,  T.  and  T. 
Clark.) 
New  Testament  Times,  by  Hausrath.     (Eng.  trans.,  Williams 
and  Norgate.) 

Palestine  in  the  Time  of  Jesus  Christ,  by  E.  Stapfer.    (Eng.  trans., 
Hodder  and  Stoughton.) 

Apostolic  and  Post -Apostolic  Times,  by  Lechler.     (Eng.  trans., 

T.  and  T.  Clark.) 
Neutestamentliche  Zeitgeschichte,  by  O.  Holtzmann.    (Freiburg.) 
The  Apostolic  Age,  by  Bartlet.    (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 
Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,  by  C.  Weitzsacker  (Eng.  trans., 

T.  and  T.  Clark.) 
Lives  of  Christ,  by  B.  Weiss  (Eng.  trans.,  T.  and  T.  Clark); 

S.  J.  Andrews — a  Student's  Text-book  (Ibister). 

Edersheim  (Longmans) ;  Didon  (Paris) ;  Geikie  (Strahan) ; 

Farrar  (Cassell) ;  Beyschlag  (Halle). 
St.  Paul  the  Traveller  and  Roman  Citizen,  Prof  Ramsay.  (Hodder 

and  Stoughton.) 
Paulinism,  by  Pfleiderer.    (Eng.  trans.,  Williams  and  Norgate.) 

5.  Introduction. — N.T.   Introductions  (in   English),  by  Salmon  ~ 

(Murray) ;  Weiss  (Eng.  trans.,  Hodder  and  Stoughton) ; 
Reuss  (Eng.  trans.,  T.  and  T.  Clark) ;  Marcus  Dods  (Theol. 
Educ,  Hodder  and  Stoughton) ;  McClymont  (Black) ; 
Jiilicher,  trans,  by  Janet  Ward  (Smith,  Elder,  and  Co.) ; 
Bacon  (Macmillan) ;  The  Historical  New  Testament,  by 
J.  Moffatt  (T.  and  T.  Clark).  In  German,  by  Zahn  (Frei- 
burg) ;  Holtzmann  (Freiburg). 

Beginnings  of  Christianity,  by  Wernle.    (Williams  and  Norgate.) 

6.  Theology. — The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  by  Wendt.     (Eng.  trans. 

T.  and  T.  Clark.) 
The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  by  Dr.  Horton.    (J.  Clarke  and  Co.) 


LIST  OF  BOOKS  483 

The   Kingdom  of  God,  and  The  Training  of  the  Twelve,  by 
Prof.  Bruce.     (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 

New  Testament  Theology,  by  Beyschlag.     (Eng.  trans.,  T.  and 
T.  Clark.) 

New  Testament  Theology,  by  B.  Weiss.     (Eng.  trans.,  T.  and  T. 
Clark.) 

Theology  of  N.T.,  by  Stevens.    (T.  and  T.  Clark.) 

Theology  of  N.T.,  by  W.  F.  Adeney.    (Theol.  Educ,  Hodder  and 
Stoughton.) 

Theology  of  Hebrews,  by  Bruce  (T.  and  T.  Clark) ;  Milligan  (T. 
and  T.  Clark). 

Theology  of  John,  by  Stevens.    (Dickinson.) 

Theology  of   St.   Paul,  by  Sabatier  (Eng.  trans.,  Hodder  and 
Stoughton) ;   Stevens  (Dickinson). 

Theologie  du  Nouveau  Testament,  by  J.  Bovon.    (Lausanne.) 

Lehrbuch  der  Neutestamentlichen  Theologie,  by  N.  T.  Holtzmann. 
(Freiburg.) 

7.  Synoptic  ProMem.^Besides  the  N.T.  Introductions  the  follow- 

ing deal  especially  with  this  subject :  Articles  Gospel  in 
Bible  Dictionary,  by  Dr.  V.  H.  Stanton ;  in  Encyc.  Bib., 
by  Dr.  Abbott  and  Schmiedel. 

The  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents,  by  Stanton.    (Camb.) 

Synopsis  of  the  Gospels  in  Greek,  by  Arthur  Wright.  (Macmillan.) 

Horae  Synopticae,  by  Sir  J.  C.  Hawkins,  Bart.    (Oxford,  Clarendon 
Press.) 

Some  Synoptic  Problems,  by  Arthur  Wright.    (Methuen.) 

The  Formation  of  the  Gospels,  by  F.  P.  Badham.    (Kegan  Paul.) 

Synopticon,  by  Rushbrooke.    (Macmillan.) 

Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  by  Bishop  Westcott, 
8th  edit.    (Macmillan.) 

Die  Synoptische  Frage,  by  P.  Wernle  (J.  C.  B.  Mohr,  Freiburg,  i.  B). 

8.  Commentaries. — For  abbreviations  see  page  473 ;  and  add  H.C.^ 

Hand  Commentar  (Leipzig) ;  C.C.S.^  for  Cassell's  Com- 
mentary for  Schools. 


484  BIBLICAL   INTRODUCTION 

Matthew.— {h)  Meyer  (T.  and  T.  Clark);  Die  Synoptiker,  by 
Holtzmann  {H.C.).  (c)  Slater  {C.B.)]  Carr  {C.B.S.)\ 
Plumptre  {CCS.) ;  Morrison  (Hodder  and  Stoughton). 
(d)  Monro  Gibson  (E.B.). 

Mark.—i^)  Swete  (Macmillan) ;  Gould  (/.C.) ;  Meyer;  Die 
Synoptiker,  by  Holtzmann  {H.C).  (c)  Salmond  {CB.) ; 
Maclear  (CB.S.) ;  Plumptre  (CCS.) ;  Morrison  (Hodder 
and  Stoughton).  (d)  The  Dean  of  Armagh  (E.B.) ; 
Cartoons  from  St.  Mark,  by  Dr.  Horton  (J.  Clarke). 

Luke.—{2L)  St.  Luke's  Gospel  in  Greek,  by  Arthur  Wright  (Mac- 
millan). (b)  Plummer  (/.C) ;  Meyer ;  Godet  (T.  and  T. 
Clark)  ;  Die  Synoptiker,  by  Holtzmann  {H.C).  (c)  Adeney 
{CB.) ;  Farrar  {CB.S.) ;  Plumptre  {CCS.),  (d)  Burton 
{E.B.). 

John.  —  (a)  Drummond  (Williams  and  Norgate) ;  Wendt,  tr. 
(Williams  and  Norgate).  (b)  Meyer;  Godet  (T.  and  T. 
Clark) ;  Westcott  (Macmillan) ;  Holtzmann  {H.C) ;  Reynolds 
(Pul.  Com.),  (c)  McClymont  {CB.) ;  Plummer  {CB.S.) ; 
Watkins  {CCS.),     (d)   Marcus  Dods  {E.B.). 

Acts.— {2)  Die  Apostelgeschichte ;  ihre  Quellen,  etc.,  by  Spitta 
(Halle);  ditto,  by  Jiingst  (Gotha).  (b)  Blass— Latin, 
(Gottenburg) ;  Hackett  (Hamilton  Adams) ;  Holtzmann 
{H.C.)\  Weiss  (Leipzig).  (c)  Bartlet  {CB.) -,  Lumby 
{CB.S.) ;  Plumptre  {CCS.),     (d)  Stokes  {E.B.). 

Romans.— (}:i)  Sanday  and  Headlam  (/.C) ;  Godet  (T.  and  T. 
Clark) ;  Vaughan  (Macmillan) ;  Lipsius  {H.C.) ;  Liddon, 
"Explanatory  Analysis"  (Longmans) ;  Meyer,  (c)  Garvie 
{CB.);  Moule  {CB.S.) ;  Sanday  {CCS.);  Beet  (Hodder 
and  Stoughton).    (d)  Moule  {E.B.). 

1  Corinthians. — (b)   Edwards  (Hodder  and  Stoughton) ;   Ellicott 

(Longmans);  Meyer;  Schmiedel  (/T.C).  (c)  Massie  (C.^ff.); 
Lias  {CB.S.);  Shore  {CCS.),  (d)  Marcus  Dods  {E.B.); 
Expository  Lectures,  by  F.  W.  Robertson  (King). 

2  Corinthians.— {a.)  Kennedy,    (b)  Meyer  ;  Schmiedel  {H.C).    (c) 

Massie  {CB.) ;  Lias  {CB.S.) ;  Plumptre  {CCS.),  (d)  Denny 
{E.B.). 
Galatians. — (b)  Lightfoot  (Macmillan) ;  Meyer ;  Ramsay  (Hodder 
and   Stoughton);    Lipsius    {H.C).      (c)    Adeney   {C.B.)\ 
Perowne  {CB.S.) ;  Sanday  {CCS.),    (d)  Findlay  {E.B.). 


LIST   OF  BOOKS  485 

Ephesians,—^)  T.  K.  Abbott  (/.C.) ;  Ellicott  (Parker) ;  Mac- 
pherson ;  Meyer;  Armitage  Robinson;  Von  Soden  {H.C.), 

(c)  G.  C.  Martin  {C.B.) ;  Moule  {C.B.S.) ;  Barry  (C.C.5.). 

(d)  Findlay  {E.B.) ;  Dale  (Hodder  and  Stoughton). 
Philippians,—(^)  Lightfoot  (Macmillan) ;  Vincent  (/.C) ;  Meyer ; 

Von  Soden  (A^.C).  (c)  G.  C.  Martin  (C.^.);  Moule 
{C,B.S:) ;  Barry  (CC^S".).  (d)  Rainy  {E.B), 
Colossians  and  Philemon.  —  (b)  Lightfoot  (Macmillan) ;  T.  K. 
Abbott,  Col.  {I.e.) ;  Vincent,  Phile. ;  Meyer ;  Von  Soden 
{H.C.).  (c)  G.  C.  Martin  {C.B.) ;  Moule  {C.B.S.) ;  Barry 
{C.C.S.).    (d)  Maclaren  {E.B.). 

I  and  2  Thessalonians. — (b)  Jowett  (Murray) ;  Ellicott  (Parker) ; 
Liinemann  (Meyer) ;  Schmiedel  (^.C).  (c)  Adeney  (C.^.)> 
Findlay  {C.B.S.) ;  Mason  {CCS),    (d)  Denny  {E.B). 

I  and  2  Timothy y  Titus.— {h)  Ellicott  (Parker) ;  Meyer ;  Von 
Soden  {H.C).  (c)  Horton  {CB)\  Humphreys  {C.B.S); 
Spence  {CCS.),    (d)  Plummer  {E.B.). 

Hebrews. — (b)  Westcott  (Macmillan) ;  Liinemann  (Meyer) ;  Von 
Soden  {H.C)  ;  Vaughan  (Macmillan).  (c)  Peake  {CB) ; 
Farrar  {C.B.S)  ;  Moulton  {CCS)  ;  Davidson  {H.B.C), 
(d)  Edwards  {E.B)  ;  Bruce  (T.  and  T.  Clark). 

James. — (b)  Mayor  (Macmillan) ;  Beyschlag  (Gottingen) ;  Von 
Soden  {H.C).  (c)  Bennett  {C.B)-,  Plumptre  {C.B.S); 
Punchard  (CC.5.).  (d)  ?\ummeT—mth /ude  {E.B)  ;  Dale 
(Hodder  and  Stoughton). 

I  and  2  Peter, /ude.  —  {h)  Bigg  (/.C.) ;  Huther  (Meyer);  Von 
Soden  {H.C).  (c)  Bennett  {C.B);  Plumptre  {C.B.S); 
Plummer  {CCS.),     (d)   Lumby  {E.B). 

i>  2,  3,  /ohn.—{h)  Westcott  (Macmillan) ;  Huther  (Meyer) ; 
Ebrard  (T.  and  T.  Clark) ;  Holtzmann  {H.C).  (c)  Bennett 
{C.B);  Plummer (C.^.6*.);  Sinclair (C.C.5.).  (d)  Alexander 
{E.B.). 

Pevetation.—{h)  Vischer  (Leipzig) ;  Volter  (Freiburg) ;  Weiss 
(Leipzig),  (c)  Anderson  Scott  {C.B);  Simcox  {C.B.S); 
Boyd  Carpenter  (CCS),     (d)   Milligan  {E.B.), 


INDEX 


Abbott,  E.  A. ,  on  Gospels,  325. 
Acrostics,  Hebrew — 

Lamentations,  212. 

Proverbs,  156. 

Psalms,  151. 

Acts  of  Apostles,  341  ff. 
Alexandria  and  Hebrews,  430. 
Amos,  240. 
Analysis  of  Historical  Books — 

Limitations  of,  31, 

Method  of,  25. 

Sketch  of,  32. 

Apocalypse,  460  ff. 

of  Baruch,  268. 

Apocalyptic   Literature,    181,   224, 
254,  271,  274,  460. 

Fourth  Gospel  and,  333  flf. 

Apocrypha — 

O.T.,  13,  268. 

Apollos  and  Hebrews,  425. 
Aquila,  3,  380. 
Aristion,  303. 
Ascension  of  Isaiah,  268. 
Assumption  of  Moses,  269. 

"Babylon,"    in    N.T.,    443,    444, 

466. 
Balaam,  69. 
Barnabas — 

Epistle  of,  469. 

Hebrews  and,  427. 

Baruch — 

Apocalypse  of,  268. 

Book  of,  269. 

Epistle  of,  268. 

Baur's  Theory,  343. 
Bel  and  the  Dragon,  269, 
Bleek  on  Hebrews,  426, 
Blessing  of — 

Jacob,  63. 

Moses,  75. 

Books  on  Biblical  study,  471  ff. 


Calvin   on    Biblical    Criticism,    6, 

10. 
Caesarea,  388. 
Canon — 

O.T.,  12. 

N.T.,  275  f. 

Canticles,  167. 
Celsus,  306. 
Census  in  Luke,  308. 
Cethubhim  {^Hagiographa)^  5,  12. 
Chronicles,  107. 
Chronology,  Pauline,  350. 
Chrysostom  on  the  Gospels,  322. 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  470. 

on  the  Gospels,  297. 

on  Hebrews,  422. 

Clement  of  Rome,  284. 

Epistle  of,  469. 

on  I  Corinthians,  364. 

on  Hebrews,  425. 

Colossians,  388  ff. 

Combined  Prophetic  Document  (J  E) 

of  Pentateuch,  47. 

combined  with  D,  50. 

Composite    character   of  books   of 

O.T.,  17. 
Composition  of  Historical  Books  of 

O.T.— 

Method,  17. 

Theories  of  {Current)^  22. 

Theories  of  ^Earlier),  19. 

Theory  of  {Dillmann)^  23. 

Theory  of  {Graf,  WeUhauseti, 

and  Kuenen),  24. 
Conquest  of  Palestine,  77. 
Corinth,  362. 

Factions  at,  367. 

Lost  Epistle,  etc.,  363, 

Corinthians  I.,  364  ff. 
Corinthians  IL,  367  ff. 
Cretans,  419. 
Criticism,  General  course  of  O.T.,  9. 


486 


INDEX 


487 


D.  16,  48,  71. 

Daniel,  227. 

Daniel,  Book  of,  224. 

Apocryphal  additions  to,  229, 

269. 
David  and  Goliath,  92,  94. 
Lament  over  Saul  and  Jonathan, 

93. 

Last  words  of,  95. 

Psalms  of,  143. 

Deborah,  Song  of,  86. 
Decalogue,  65. 
Deuteronomic — 

Edition  of  Historical  Books,  50. 

Material  in  Historical  Books,  49. 

Deuteronomy,  71. 
Diatessaron,  Tatian's,  281,  329. 
Didache,  469. 

and  John,  329. 

and  Synoptics,  284. 

Dillmann  on  Pentateuch,  23. 
Dionysius  on  John,  333  ff.,  463. 

E,4S. 

Ecclesiastes,  x6o. 

Ecclesiasticus,  4,  269. 

El,  100. 

Elijah  and  Elisha,  100. 

Elohistic  Document  (E)  of  Penta- 
teuch, etc.,  45. 

Combined  with  J,  47. 

Enoch — 

Book  of,  270. 

Book  of  the  Secrets  of,  270. 

Epaphras,  391,  398. 

Ephesians,  394  £f. 

Esdras,  Books  of,  271. 

Essenes,  384. 

Esther,  Book  of,  121. 

Apocryphal  additions  to,  I2I, 

271. 

Eusebius,  Silence  of,  280. 

Evidence  as  to  date,  etc.,  of  O.T. 
books — 

External,  3. 

Internal,  39. 

Exodus,  64. 

Exodus,  Book  of,  64. 

Ezekiel,  213. 

Ezekiel,  Book  of,  213. 

Ezra,  Book  of,  Z07,  Z17. 

Florinus,  Letter  to,  330. 


Fourth  Gospel,  328  ff. 

Fragmentary  theory  of  composition 
of  Pentateuch,  21. 

Galatian  Churches,  372. 
Galatians,  372  ff. 
Gamaliel,  344. 
General  Epistles,  434  ff. 
Genesis,  00. 
Gospels— 

Luke,  304  ff. 

John,  328. 

Mark,  295  ff. 

Matthew,  285  ff. 

Synoptic,  277. 

Graf  on  Pentateuch,  24. 
Greek  versions  of  O.T.,  2,  3. 
Gunkel,  464. 

H,52. 

Habakkuk,  251. 
Haggai,  254. 
Hagiographa,  5,  12. 
Hannah,  Song  of,  91. 
Harnack — 

Chronology,  350. 

List  of  Gospels,  278. 

Hebrew  MSS.  of  O.T.,  I. 
Hebrews,  421  ff. 
Heresies,  411. 
Hexateuch,  16. 
Hippolytus  on  John,  329. 
Historical  Books  of  O.T.— 

mode  of  composition,  1 7,  56. 

sources.     See  D,  E,  El,  H,  J, 

P,  and  the  several  books. 

teaching,  103. 

Hosea,  234. 

Imprisonment,  Epistles  of,  387  ff. 
Internal  evidence  on  books  of  O.T., 

39. 
Irenseus  on  Gospels,  281,  297. 
Isaiah,  172. 

Ascension  of,  268. 

Isaiah,  Book  of— 

General  analysis,  171. 

Present  book,  171. 

i.-xxxv.,  172. 

xxxvi.-xxxix.,  184. 

xl.-lxvi.  {Second  Isaiah),  185. 

xl.-lv.  {Detitero- Isaiah),  188. 

lvi.-lxvi.  {Trito- Isaiah),  193. 

Servant  of  Jehovah,  191. 


4U 


INDEX 


L43. 

Jacob,  Blessing  of,  63. 
James,  434  ft. 
Jashar,  Book  of,  80. 
JE.  47. 
JED,  50. 

Jehovistic  Document  (J)  of  Penta- 
teuch, 43. 

combined  with  E,  47. 

Jeremiah,  195. 

Epistle  of,  271. 

Jeremiah,  Book  of,  195. 
Jerome,  Vulgate,  3,  470. 
Jerusalem,  Paul's  visits  to,  376. 
Jesus  ben  Sirach,  269. 
Job,  123. 

iob.  Book  of,  123. 
oel,  237. 
ohn— 

Gospel,  328  fif. 

I.  Epistle,  452  fT. 

II.  Epistle,  456  ff. 

III.  Epistle,  457  ff. 

Apocalypse,  400  ff. 

Jonah,  244. 
Josephus,  4,  271. 

and  Acts,  343  ff. 

Joshua,  77. 
I  ubilees,  Book  of,  272. 
'udas  of  Galilee,  344. 
"ude,  450,  ff. 

udgres,  82. 

udith,  272. 
Justification  in  James,  436,  439. 
Justin  Martyr — 

Memoirs  of  Apostles,  282. 

■        on  John,  329. 
on  Luke,  306. 

Kethubhim  {Hagiographa)^  5,  12. 
Kings,  95. 
Koheleth,  i6a 

Lamentations,  210. 
Laodicea,  Council  of,  421. 
Laodiceans,  Epistle  to,  351,  395. 
Law,  59,  105. 
— —  of  holiness,  52,  67. 
Leviticus,  66. 

'■ xii.-xxvi.,  52,  67. 

Lightfoot — 

on  Galatians,  372. 

on  Philippians,  401. 


Logia^  286,  326  ff. 
Luke,  304  ff. 

and  Acts,  341  ff. 

and  Hebrews,  425. 

Luther  on  Biblical  Criticism,  10. 
Lycus  Valley,    Churches   of,   389, 
400. 

Maccabean  Psalms,  145. 
Maccabees,  Books  of,  272. 
Malachi,  264. 
"  Man  of  Sin,"  359. 
Manasseh,  Prayer  of,  273. 
Marcion — 

Canon,  407. 

Gospel,  306. 

Mark,  295  ff. 

Priority  of,  324. 

Masoretic  Text,  i. 
Matthew,  285  ff. 

Hebrew,  Logia^  286  ff. 

Megilloth,  12. 
Messianic — 

Prophecies,    173,    175,    177, 

182  f.,   188- 191,  205,  220,  242, 
248,  257,  262  ff.,  268,  270,  273. 

Psalms,  147. 

Micah,  247. 

Milligan,  464. 

Minor  Prophets,  234. 

Mosaic    material    in    Pentateuch, 

59. 
Moses — 

Assumption  of,  269. 

Blessing  of,  75. 

Laws  and  teaching  of,    59, 

105. 

Song  of,  75. 

Song  of  (at  Red  Sea),  65. 

MSS.  (O.T.),  I. 
Muratorian  Fragment,  470. 

Nahum,  250. 
Nehemiah,  107,  117. 
Numbers,  67. 

Obadiah,  243. 

Old  Latin  version  of  O.T.,  3,  470. 

Onesimus,  393,  394. 

Onesiphorus,  417. 

Ophites,  400. 

Origen — 

Mark,  297. 

Hebrews,  422. 


INDEX 


489 


O.T.— 

.^—  Canon,  12. 

Text,  I. 

Versions,  2. 

P,  52,  53. 

Pantaenus  on  Hebrews,  422. 

Papias,  286,  296,  469. 

Parallelism  in  Hebrew  poetry,  149. 

Parousia,  356. 

Pastoral  Epistles,  406  ff. 

Paul,  St.,  349  ff. 

Second  imprisonment,  410. 

Pentateuch — 

Complete,  56. 

Criticism,  points  of  agreement 

and  difference,  23. 

Dillmann  on,  23. 

Graf  on,  24. 

Mosaic  material  in,  59. 

Cf.  Historical  Books. 
Peshito,  3,  470. 
Peter  I.,  440  ff. 
Peter  II.,  447  ff. 
Peter,  St.,  and  Mark,  296. 

Memoirs  of,  296. 

Philemon,  393  ff. 

Philippians,  399  ff. 

Philo,  3,  273,  340. 

Phoebe,  380. 

Poetry,  Form  of  Hebrew,  1 49. 

Polycarp,  330. 

on  John,  329, 

Pre-exilic  Psalms,  143. 
Priestly  Code  (P),  53. 

combined  with  JED,  56. 

Prisca,  380. 
Proverbs,  152. 
Psalms,  134. 

xviii.,  94. 

Acrostic,  151. 

Davidic,  143. 

Maccabean,  145, 

■  ■  Messianic,  147. 
— —  Pre-exilic,  143. 
of  Solomon,  273. 

Qinah  Metre,  212. 
Qoheleth,  160. 
Quirinius,  308. 

Ramsay — 

on  Acts,  342. 


Ramsay  on  Galatians,  372. 
Revelation,  460  ff. 
Roman  Government,  410. 
Romans,  378  ff. 
Rome,  Church  at,  378. 
Ruth,  87. 

Samaritan  Pentateuch,  2,  5. 

Samuel,  89. 

Septuagint,  2,  4. 

Servant  of  Jehovah,  191. 

Sethites,  400. 

Sibyllines,  273. 

Solomon — 

Psalms  of,  273. 

Song  of,  167. 

Wisdom  of,  274. 

Song  of — 

Deborah,  86. 

Hannah,  91. 

Moses,  75. 

Moses  at  Red  Sea,  65. 

Solomon,  167. 

The  Three  Children,  269. 

Triumph  over  Moab,  65. 

Supernatural  Religion^  280. 

Supplementary  theory  of  compo- 
sition of  Pentateuch,  21. 

Susanna,  Book  of,  269. 

Symbols  used  in  O.T.  criticism,  15, 
24,  32,  62  n. 

Symmachus,  3. 

Synoptic  Problem,  316  ff. 

Synoptics  and  Fourth  Gospel,  334  ff. 

Talmud,  7. 
Targums,  2. 
Tatian,  281,  329. 
Tel-el-Amarna  Tablets,  77. 
Ten  Commandments,  65. 
Terms  of  O.T.  criticism,  15. 
Testament  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs, 

274. 
Text  of  O.T. ,  I. 
Theodotion,  3. 
Theophilus  on  John,  330, 
Thessalonians,  352  ff. 
Theudas,  344. 

Three  Children,  Song  of,  269. 
Timothy  I.,  414  ff. 
Timothy  II.,  417  f. 
Titus,  418  ff. 
Tobit,  274. 


490 

Tradition,  Oral,  321  ff. 
Tubingen  School,  343. 
Tychicus,  391,  398. 

UrmarcuSf  322 

Versions  of  O.T.,  2,3. 
Vischer,  463. 
Volker,  463. 
Vulgate,  3,  470. 


INDEX 


Wars  of  Jehovah,  Book  of,  69. 
Weyland,  464. 
Wisdom — 

of  Jesus  ben  Sirach,  269. 

of  Solomon,  274, 

Zechariah— 

i.-viii.,  256. 

ix.-xiv.,  259, 

Zephaniah,  253. 


PLYMOUTH 

WILLIAM  BBSNCON  AMD  SON 

PRINTEB8 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 

AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL   BE  ASSESSED    FOR    FAILURE  TO    RETURN 
THIS    BOOK    ON    THE    DATE   DUE.    THE   PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  50  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY    AND    TO     $1.00     ON     THE    SEVENTH     DAY 
OVERDUE. 

JUL   20   laitt 

WIAY     b   1939 

MAY    131940 

26Se'5'^t" 

' 

,' 

1 

1 

J 

t 

1 

1 

/ 

XB2I74'6? 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  UBRARY 


